PRINCETON,  N.  J. 
The  Stephen  Collins  Donation. 

No.  Ca^c,  ^  " 


No.  >s/?4/;^^^^"^S^----- 


-^-^\ 


BX  9053  .H4  1868 
Hetherington,  W.  M.  1803- 

1865, 
History  of  the  Westminster  \ 


m 

HISTORY 


or  THE 


\^  ESTMINSTER   ASSEMBLY 


DIVINES 


BY  THE 

REV.  W.  M.  HETHERINGTON, 

AUTtiOR     OK    THE      '  HIS  rnRY     OF    THK     C  HIRCH    OF    SCOTLAND 


NEW    YORK: 
aOBERT    CARTER  &   BROTHERS 

No.  530    BROADWAY. 

1868. 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER    I. 

INTBODUCTORY. 

Page 
Importance  of  the  Westminster  Assembly,  -         -       13,14 

Quarrel  between  Henry  VHI.  and  the  Pope,  -        -         15 

Cranmer's  Suggestion,  ------  ib. 

1531     Henry  styled  Supreme  Head  of  the  Church,      -         -         -         17 
Effects  of  the  Power  thus  Assumed,  .        _         .       17,18 

Six  Articles  of  Religious  Agreement,       -        -         -         -         19 
Reformation  promoted  by  Edward  VI.,         _         -        .  20 

The  Liturgy  and  Book  of  Ordinations,     -         -         -         -21,22. 

1550     Hooper  refuses  the  Episcopal  Vestments,      -         -         -  22 

Articles  of  Religion, -23 

*'  Bloody  Mary,"  and  Persecution,       -         -         -         -  24 

"  Frankfort  Troubles" — Contests  about  Ceremonies,         -   25-27 
Queen  Elizabeth — Act  of  Supremacy,  -         -         -  27 

Renewed  Contests  about  Vestments  and  Ceremonies,       -         29 

1562     Convocation — Close  of  Reforming  Period,  -         -  30 

General  View  of  the  Grounds  of  Controversy  between  the 

Court  Divines  and  the  Reforming  Party,  -         -   31-33 

Despotic  Injunction  of  the  Queen,        _         -         .         -  34 

Suspension  of  those  who  refused  to  Conform,  and  who, 

wishing  greater  Purity,  were  now  called  Puritans,     -         35 
Remonstrances  of  Foreign  Churches,  _         -         -  36 

1566  The  Puritans  begin  to  form  a  separate  Body,  -         -        ib. 
Chief  Differences  between  them  and  the  Church,         -       37,  38 

1567  Their  first  Communion  interrupted,         -         -         -         -         39 
Parliament  attempts  to  interpose,  but  in  vain,      -  39,  40 

State  of  Religion  in  England, 40,41 

Associations  for  Worship,  Discipline,  «  Prophesyings,"  41 

Cartwright  and  Whitgift, 42 

I57S     First  Presbytery  constituted  in  England,      -         -        -  43 


66 


]y  table  of  contents. 

Pape 
Grindal  interposes,  but  in  vain,  -----  44 
Puritan  Writings  proliibited,         -----  45 

Rise  of  the  Brownists,  46,47 

Whitgift's  Articles — Hisrh  Commission,        -         .         -  48 

J 588     Bancroft's  Theory  of  jwrc  divino  Prelacy,  -         -         -  49,  50 

The  Martin  Mar-Prelate  Tracts,  .         -         -         -  51 

Attempt  of  Parliament  to  interfere— Sufferings  of  Puritans,  51,  52 

Controversy  on  Sabbath-keeping,          -         -         -         -  ^-' 

Growth  of  Arminianism  among  the  Prelatists,          -         -  53 
King  James— The  Millenary  Petition,          -         -         -       53,54 

Hampton  Court  Conference,             '         '         '         '         '  ^^ 

Bancroft  and  the  High  Commission,               -         -         -  57 

Civil  Liberty  manifestly  endangered,        -         -         -         -  58 

1616     Rise  of  the  Independents,  or  Congregationalists,            -  59 

1618     The  King's  Book  of  Sports,              i*^- 

The  King's  Despotism  begins  to  rouse  Parliament,        -  61 
Accession  of  Charles  I.,           ._----  62 
Despotic  Principles  of  the  High  Church  Party,              -  63 
The  Parliament  begins  to  defend  Liberty,  Civil  and  Re- 
ligious,        --------  lb. 

1633     The  Book  of  Sports  revived, 64 

Continued  Contest  between  the  King  and  Parliament,  65 
Laud's  cruel  Treatment  of  Leighton,  Burton,  Bastwick, 

and  Prynne, 

Hampden  and  the  Ship-money  Tax,  -         -         -         -  66.  67 

The  Emigration  of  Hampden  and  Cromwell  prohibited,  67 

Laud  reaches  the  climax  of  Prelatic  Usurpation,       -         -  68 

Abortive  attempt  to  force  Prelacy  on  Scotland,              -  ib. 

1640     The  Long  Parliament  called— Its  vigorous  measures,  70,  71 

Laud  and  the  Earl  of  Strafford  impeached,       -         -         -  71 

Prelatic  Controversy — Smectymnuus,            -         -        -  72 

Parliament  declares  its  own  sittings  permanent,       -        -  74 

Protestation  of  Parliament,           -----  75 

The  King  in  Scotland,  -         -         -        -        -        -  76,  77 

Remonstrance  of  the  House  of  Commons,               -         -  78 

Impeachment  of  the  Bishops, ib. 

The  King  attempts  to  seize  the  five  Members,  and  then 

leaves  London,         -------79 

1642    The  Royal  Standard  raised  at  Nottingham,            -         -  80 

Bill  for  t^e  Abolition  of  Prelacy,               -         -         -        -  81 

Ordinance  calling  the  Assembly  of  Divines,          -        -  84 

Outline  of  Scottish  Affairs,               -----  87 

Reflections  suggested  by  the  preceding  Narrative,        -  93 


CHAPTER    II. 

MEETING    OF   THE   WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBLY. 

1643     List  oT  the  Assembly  of  Divines,  •         -         -         -97,98 

First  Meeting  of  the  Assembly — Its  Theory,  -         99,  100 


T^BLF.  OF  CONTENTS.  V 

Page 

Greneral  Regulations  of  the  Assembly,           -        -        -  JQI 

Baillie's  Account  of  its  Order  of  Procedure,       -         •  102 

Prelatic  members  of  Assembly,             -         .         ,        „  104 

Fasts  and  Sermons  of  the  Assembly,          _         .         .  jb 

Intercourse  with  the  Church  of  Scotland,      -         -        -  105 

Deliberations  respecting  a  League  or  Covenant,        -  106 

The  Solemn  League  and  Covenant,          -        -        -  111 

Remarks  concerning  it,             _         _         _         .         _  115 

Parties  in  the  Westminster  Assembly,           -        -         -  116 

Episcopalians,          -_---._  ib. 

Presbyterians,     -        -         -        -        -        -        -         -  1J7 

Independents,           r         -         -         -         -         -         -  118 

Erastians,            -_--___-  120 

Remarks  concerning  these  Parties,            -         -        .  123 

The  Scottish  Commissioners  to  the  Assembly,       -         -  124 
Characters  of  Henderson,   Gillespie,  Rutherford,   and 

Baillie, 125 

Numerous  Sects  in  England,     -----  128 

Causes  of  these  numerous  Sects,           -         -        .         _  129 

Effects  on  the  Assembly  and  the  Kingdom,        -         -  132 

Political  Independents — Toleration,    -        -        -        -  ib. 


CHAPTER    III. 


THE  INDEPENDENT  CONTROVERSY. 

Order  to  frame  a  Directory  of  Worship,        -         -         -  135 
Deliberations  concerning  Office-bearers  in  the  Church,  137,  138 

Concerning  the  Office  of  Apostles,       .         -         .         -  139 

Concerning  Pastors  and  Teachers,  or  Doctors,           -  140 

Concerning  Ruling  Elders,            _         -         _         -         -  141 

Concerning  Deacons,        ------  143 

Suggestions  respecting  the  Supply  of  Vacant  Charges,  144 

1644     The  Subject  of  Ordmation  introduced,       -         -         -  146 

The  Struggle  between  the  Parties  begun,      -         -         -  148 

Proposition  of  the  Independents  concerning  Ordination,  149 

Consent  of  the  Congregation  to,  or  Election  of  the  Pastor,  151 
Alterations  made  by  the  Parliament  in  the  Doctrinal  part 

of  Ordination,  successfully  resisted  by  the  Assembly,  152 

Directory  for  Public  Worship,      -----  153 

Form  of  Church  Government  and  Discipline,  154 

Opposition  made  by  the  Independents,           _         -         _  ib. 

Their  "  Apologeti.cal  Narration" — Extracts,     -        -  156 

Answers  to  that  Work — Antapologia,            _         -         -  164 

Remarks  on  the  Independent  Controversy,         -         -  ib. 
The  Arguments  on  both  sides  stated,             .         .        -   165-170 

Admission  of  a  close  approximation,          -         _         -  171 

"  Many  Congregatitf  ns  under  one  Presbytery"  debated,  172 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS, 

Remarkable  Debate  between  Selden  and  Gillespie,       -  172,  J 73 

Nye's  argument  against  Presbytery  censured,    -         -  174 

Admissions  by  the  Independents,          _         -         .         -  176 

Debate  on  Congregational  Ordination,      -         -  ^      -  179 

Suspension  from  Sacraments,  and  Excommunication,     -  180 

Committee  of  Accommodation,          _         -         -         -  182 

Proceedings  of  that  Committee,             _         .         .         _  183 

Reasons  of  Dissent  by  the  Independents,            -         -  185 

The  Assembly's  Answer,     ------  186 

Reasons  of  Dissent,  and  Answers,  or  Grand  Debate,  191 

Independents  requested  to  state  their  own  Model,          -  192 

They  decline,  and  publish  ''  A  Copy  o^?  Remonstrance,"  193 

Answer  to  this  by  the  Assembly,       -         -         -         -  ib. 

Committee  of  Accommodation  revived — Abandoned,     -  194 

Remarks  on  this  Controversy  and  its  consequences,  195 


CHAPTER    IV. 

THE    ERASTIAN    CONTROVERSY. 

Preliminary  Remarks  on  the  Erastian  Theory,      -         -  200 

Selden's  Hint  respecting  Excommunication,       -         -  203 

His  Argument  on  1  Cor.  v.  4, 204 

Selden's  Argument  on  Matt,  xviii.  15-18,  -         -      205,  206 

Answered  by  Gillespie,  -         .         -  -         -  206,  207 

Whitelocke's  Argument  and  Suggestion  on  Divine  Right,  207 

Firmness  of  the  Assembly — Successful,         _         -         -  208 

Whitelocke  and  the  jus  divinum  Claim  in  Parliament,  210 
t645     Conduct  of  Parliament  on  the  Suspending  of  Ignorant 

and  Scandalous  Persons  from  the  Lord's  Table,     -  212 

Selden's  Argument  on  that  Subject,           -         -         _  213 

Whitelocke's  Argument, 214 

Remarks  on  these  Arguments,           -         -         -         -  216 

Ordinance  about  Suspension,  &,c. — Erastian  Clause,     -  219 
Petitions  from  London  and  the  City  Ministers,           -  220 
1646     Ordinance  for  the  Choice  of  Elders— Erastian  Clause,  222 
Remonstrance  of  the  Scottish  Parliamentary  Commis- 
sioners,       __------  224 

Haughty  Conduct  of  the  English  Parliament,    -         -  226 

Petition  of  the  Assembly — How  received,  -  -  227 
The  Parliament's  ;m.v  diyiimm  Questions,  -  -  227,228 
The  Assembly's  Deliverance  on  the  essential  element  of 

the  Controversy — Firmness  of  the  Assembly,          -  229 

The  Assembly  prepares  Answers  to  these  Questions,  231 

The  jus  fiiymM/n  Treatise  by  the  City  Ministers,           -  232 

Outline  of  Political  Events, ^  233 

The  King  retires  to  the  Scottish  Army — Altered  tone  of 

Parliament,          ...----  ib. 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS.  Vll 

Pa^e 
Erastian  Clause  removed  from  the  Ordinance  for  the 

choice  of  Elders  and  erection  of  Presbyteries,         -  234 

The  King  in  the  Scottish  Array — Negotiations,  -  235 

Vindication  of  Scotland  from  the  accusation  of  having 

sold  the  King— True  state  of  the  matter,        -         -   236-239 

1647  Removal  of  obstructions,  and  erection  of  Presbyteries 

and  Synods, 239,  240 

Negotiations  with  the  King — Votes  of  Parliament  con- 
cerning Church  Government  and  Toleration,          -  240 
Preparation  of  the  Confession  of  Faith,             -  242 
Not  the  slightest  Erastian  modification  admitted,           -  243 
Presented  to  Parliament — Scripture  proofs  required,  244 

1648  How  far  ratified  by  Parliament — What  alterations  sug- 

gested— What  topics  recommitted — Remarks,         -  245 

Literature  of  the  Erastian  Controversy,    -         -         -  246 

Theories  of  diflferent  shades  of  Erastianism,  -         -  247 

Coleman's  Sermon,  __.---  249 

Gillespie's  Brotherly  Examination,       .         -         -         -  250 

Controversy  between  Coleman  and  Gillespie,    -         -  251 

Gillespie's  Aaron's  Rod  Blossoming,  _         -         -  252 

Rutherford's  Divine  Right  of  Church  Government,   -  254 

Treatise  by  ApoUonius,        .-..--  255 

Concluding  Remarks  on  Erastianism,       _        -        -  256 


CHAPTER    V. 

CONCLUSION    OF   THE  WESTMINSTER  ASSEIWBLY. 

1647-8  The  Catechisms  COMPOSED, 257 

Inquiry  concerning  the  Authorship  of  the  Catechisms,  259 

Departure  of  the  Scottish  Commissioners,     -         -         -  260 

1649     Dissolution  of  the  Assembly, 262 

Ratification  of  the  Westminster  Assembly's  productions 

by  the  Church  of  Scotland,  with  explanations,        -  263 

Outline  of  subsequent  events  in  England,          -         -  264 

Usurpations  of  the  Army  and  Cromwell,       -         -         -  265 

The  King  in  the  Isle  of  Wight— Negotiations,           -  266 

Death  of  Charles  I.,    ------         -  267 

Dissolution  of  the  Long  Parliament  and  the  Westminster 

Assembly, 268 

The  Engagement — Ejection  of  Presbyterians,            -  269 

Committee  of  Triers,  -----         7         '  }^' 

1658  The  Independents  in  Power — The  Savoy  Confession,  271 
Death  of  Cromwell — Restoration  of  Charles  II.,  -  ^  272 
Prelacy  Restored — The  Savoy  Conference,         -         -      272,  273 

1662     The  Act  of  Uniformity— Two  Thousand  Presbyterian 

Ministers  ejected  on  St.  Bartholomew's  Day,          -  274 

Divines  of  the  Westminster  Assembly  ejected,           -  275 

Retrospective  view  of  the  whole  subject,      -        -        -  276 


VUl  TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 

Pase 

Main  object  of  the  Westminster  Assembly,        .        -  276 

Advanlasres  of  Religious  Uniformity,  _         _         -  278 

Effects  of  the  Assembly — On  Universities,         -         -  279 

On  Theolo2:ical  Literature,  .         .         -         -         -  280 

On  the  State  of  Education  in  England,      -        -        -      280,281 
Sectarianism — Slate  of  the  Army,          .         _         .         -  281 

On  Religions  Toleration,  -----      282,  283 

Its  True  Nature  intimated,  -----  284 

Liberty  of  Conscience,  -----  \h. 

How  Misunderstood  by  both  Parties,    -         -        -         -  285 

Unlimited  Toleration  not  granted  by  the  Independents 

when  in  Power, -  286 

Opinions  of  the  Early  Reformers — of  the  Church  of  Scot- 
land— of  the  Westminster  Assembly,     -         -         -286,287 
Fundamental  Principles  of  Faith,  by  the  Independents,  289,  290 
Great  Idea  of  a  General  Protestant  Union  entertained 

by  the  Westminster  Assembly,      -         -         -         -  290,  291 
Coincidences  between  that  Period  and  the  present,  -  294 

How  Union  yet  Attainable — And  imperatively  Necessary,  297 

Conclusion,  --------         298 


APPENDIX. 

I.  Religious  Uniformity  Recommended  by  the  Scottish  Com- 
missioners in  1640-41— Their  Views,  -         -  300 

II.  Extracts  from  Gillespie's  Manuscripts;   and  Extracts  on 

Election  of  Ministers, 307 

III.  Ordinance  about  Suspension,  &c.,  -        -        -        -  31 J 

IV.  Ordinance  for  the  Choice  of  Elders,        -        -        -        -  ib. 


PREFACE. 


In  common  with  all  true  Presbyterians,  I  have  often  regretted  the  want 
of  a  history  of  the  Westminster  Assembly  of  Divines,  by  whose  labors 
were  produced  the  Confession  of  Faith,  the  Directory  of  Public  Worship, 
the  Form  of  Church  Government,  and  the  Catechisms,  which  have  so 
long  been  held  as  the  Standards  of  the  Presbyterian  Churches  through- 
out the  world.  Especially  in  such  a  time  as  the  present,  when  all  dis- 
tinctive Presbyteriaii  principles  are  not  only  called  in  question,  but  also 
misrepresented  and  condemned,  such  a  want  has  become  absolutely  un- 
endurable, unless  Presbyterians  are  willing  to  permit  their  Church  to 
perish  under  a  load  of  unanswered,  yet  easily  refuted,  calumny.  And 
as  ihe  best  refutation  of  calumny  is  the  plain  and  direct  statement  of 
truth,  it  is  by  that  process  that  I  have  endeav^ored  to  vindicate  the 
principles  and  the  character  of  the  Presbyterian  Church. 

When  contemplating  the  subject,  there  were  two  not  very  reconcilable 
ideas  before  my  mind.  The  one  was,  to  restrict  the  Work  to  such  a 
size  as  might  keep  it  within  the  reach  of  all  Presbyterians,  even  those 
wnose  means  were  more  limited  than  their  inclinations,  but  who  equally 
needed  and  desired  information ;  the  other  was,  to  give  details  suffi- 
ciently minute  and  conclusive  to  place  the  whole  matter  fully  and  fairly 
before  the  mind  of  the  reader,  that  he  might  be  able  to  form  an  accurate 
judgment  respecting  the  character  and  proceedings  of  the  Westminster 
Assembly,  and  also  of  the  Church  and  people  of  Scotland,  who  were  so 
intimately  connected  with  it.  How  far  these  conflicting  purposes  have 
been  reconciled  it  is  for  others  to  judge ;  this,  however,  I  may  be  per 
mitted  to  say,  that  no  pains  have  been  spared  in  the  endeavor  to  ascer- 
tain the  truth  in  even  the  most  minute  points  which  required  ii  vestiga- 
lion ;  almost  every  book  or  pamphlet  of  any  importance  written  at  the 
time,  or  by  men  whose  course  of  inquiries  liave  led  them  to  traverse  thai 


X  PREFACE. 

period,  having  been  carefully  read.  I  had,  indeed,  entertained  the  de- 
sign of  giving  a  complete  list  of  all  the  productions,  in  book  or  pamphlet 
form,  which  have  been  consulted  or  perused ;  but,  in  honest  sincerity, 
I  confess  that  I  shrunk  from  doing  so,  lest  it  might  seem  too  like  mere 
ostentation.  For  a  similar  reason,  but  one  or  two  references  to  author- 
ities have  been  given,  when  it  would  have  been  equally  easy  to  have 
produced  half  a  dozen ;  and  I  have  chiefly  referred  to  original  authori- 
ties, rather  than  to  those  which  may  be  got  in  the  common  histories  .of 
the  period  ;  for  there  can  be  little  use  in  quoting  Hume,  and  Brodie,  and 
Laing,  and  Godwin,  and  D'Israeli,  when  we  have  before  us  the  original 
authorities  on  which  their  statements  are  founded.  By  adopting  this 
method,  I  have  also  avoided  the  necessity  of  encumbering  my  Work  with 
digressive  corrections  of  the  erroneous  or  distorted  views  generally  given 
by  these  historians,  in  their  accounts  of  the  Westminster  Assembly,  and 
of  the  conduct  of  the  Presbyterians. 

Inquiries  have  been  frequently  made  respecting  the  manuscript  of  the 
Westminster  Assembly's  proceedings,  kept  by  the  scribes  or  clerks  of  the 
Assembly;  but  that  important  document  appears  to  be  irrecoverably 
lost.  One  account  states,  that  it  was  burned  in  the  great  fire  of  London, 
in  the  year  1666.  It  was  long  thought  that  a  copy  of  it  had  been  taken, 
and  was  preserved  in  the  Library  of  Sion  College;  and  some  aver  that 
this  was  actually  the  case,  and  that  it,  too,  was  destroyed  in  the  fire 
which  burned  the  House  of  Commons  in  1834,  having  been  placed  there, 
along  with  other  manuscript  records  relating  to  the  Church  of  Scotland, 
during  the  inquiries  of  the  Committee  on  Patronage. 

We  are  informed  by  Baillie,  that  many  members  of  the  Assembly  em- 
ployed themselves  in  taking  copious  notes,  during  the  course  of  the  dis- 
cussions in  which  they  were  engaged.  It  might  have  been  expected 
that  several  of  these  manuscript  note-books  would  have  been  still  extant, 
by  comparing  which,  the  loss  of  the  Assembly's  own  record  might  have 
been  in  a  great  measure  supplied.  None,  however,  have  been  published, 
except  Lightfoot's  Journal  and  Baillie's  Letters ;  which  are  accordingly 
the  most  minute  and  authentic  accounts  that  can  now  be  obtained.  The 
edition  of  Baillie  to  which  I  have  referred,  is  that  admirable  one  recently 
published  under  the  care  of  David  Laing,  Esq.  To  that  gentleman,  to 
the  Librarians  of  the  Advocates'  and  the  Theoloirical  Libraries,  to  the 
Rev.  Dr.  Cunninsham,  the  Rev.  Thomas  M'Crie,  the  Rev.  William 
Goold,  the  Rev.  Samuel  Martin  of  Bathgate,  and  the  Rev.  Robert  Craig 
of  Rothesay,  I  take  this  opportunity  of  expressing  my  grateful  thankt 
for  the  access  which  they  so  readily  gave  me  to  their  literary  stores- 


PREFACE.  XI 

Dr.  Thomas  Goodwin,  one  of  the  leading  Independent  divines,  wrote 
fifteen  volumes  of  notes  or  journals  of  the  Assembly's  proceedings,  as 
we  are  informed  in  a  memoir  of  his  life  by  his  son,  three  only  of  which 
are  still  preserved  in  Dr.  Williams'  Library,  London.  It  was  my  inten- 
tion to  have  consulted  these,  but  I  found  it  impracticable  at  the  time. 
There  are  in  the  Advocates'  Library,  Edinburgh,  two  manuscript 
volumes  of  notes  by  Gillespie, one  in  quarto,  the  other  in  octavo;  both  of 
which  I  have  been  courteously  permitted  to  peruse.  They  seem  to  be 
transcripts  from  the  original,  and  of  the  two  the  octavo  is  the  more 
complete.  They  both  begin  February  2,  1644 ;  the  quarto  ends  May 
22,  and  the  octavo,  October  2.5,  the  same  year.  Their  chief  value  con 
sists  in  the  complete  corroboration  which  they  furnish  to  the  printed 
accounts  of  Lightfoot  and  Baillie, — as  will  be  seen  from  an  extract  in- 
serted in  the  Appendix  ;  but  they  would  be  well  worthy  of  publication 
in  any  collected  edition  of  Gillespie's  works. 

It  has  not  been  thought  necessary  to  present  an  outline  of  the  doctri- 
nal productions  of  the  Westminster  Assembly,  and  of  the  Confession  of 
Faith  in  particular ;  not  because  these  were  not  in  reality  the  most  va- 
luable of  their  labors,  but  because  there  prevailed  such  a  degree  of  una- 
nimity among  the  Divines  in  matters  of  doctrine,  that  their  deliberations 
on  these  points  did  not  assume  the  character  of  controversy,  and  fur- 
nished no  materials  for  historical  narrative,  however  interesting  and 
important  to  the  theologian. 

In  tracins:  the  controversies  by  which  both  Church  and  kingdom  were 
agitated  during  the  deliberations  of  the  W^estminster  Assembly,  it  has 
been  my  endeavor  to  avoid,  as  much  as  possible,  giving  a  controversial 
uspect  to  my  own  production.  My  duty  was,  to  relate  faithfully  what 
was  said,  written,  and  done,  by  the  eminent  men  of  that  period  ;  and,  in 
nischarging  that  duty,  I  have  often  felt  it  expedient  to  transcribe  their 
own  language,  as  the  most  impartial  way  of  recording  their  sentiments; 
and  when  occasionally  stating  my  own  opinions,  I  have  striven  to  do  so 
as  fairly  and  impartially  as  may  well  be  expected  from  one  who  does 
not  hesitate  to  acknowledge  that  he  feels  deeply  and  warmly  interested 
m  everything  that  relates  to  Presbyterian  principles  and  character. 
Certainly  I  have  no  wish  to  misrepresent  either  the  opinions  or  the 
practice  of  any  body  of  sincere  Christians,— least  of  all  would  I  censure 
harshly  the  errors  into  which  pious  and  earnest-hearted  men  were  driven 
by  Prelatic  persecution,  or  into  which  they  fell  in  the  sudden  revulsion 
l)roduced  by  its  overthrow,  and  in  the  excitement  arising  from  unwonted 
religious  liberty.     Let  me  tru-^t  that  Evangelical   Dissenters  will  give 


XU  PREFACE. 

credit  to  the  sincerity  of  the  feelings  which  I  thus  avow.  There  is  no 
pleasure  in  recording  the  errors  of  the  good  and  the  follies  of  the  wise, 
but  there  may  be  much  advantage,  if  we  are  thereby  taught  to  shun  the 
error  and  the  folly,  and  to  imitate  only  the  goodness  and  the  wisdom. 

The  plan  of  compression  within  the  narrowest  practicable  limits 
which  I  have  adopted,  has  prevented  me  from  recording  many  particu- 
lars of  much  interest  and  importance ;  but  should  time  and  health  be 
spared  me,  I  may  at  some  future  period  resume  the  task,  and  attempt 
to  produce  a  work  on  the  subject  at  once  more  minute  and  more  com- 
prehensive. In  the  meantime,  if  my  present  Work  shall  be  found  to 
have  vindicated  the  character  of  that  truly  venerable  body  of  Presbyte- 
rian f^ivines  from  the  unjust  aspersions  by  which  it  has  been  so  long 
assailed,  and  to  have  rendered  the  principles  which  they  held,  and  the 
objects  which  they  sought  to  accomplish,  more  clear  and  intelligible  than 
they  have  hitherto  been,  I  shall  be  amply  recompensed, — especially  if, 
in  pointing  out  the  errors  into  which  contending  parties  fell,  and  the 
way  in  which  these  errors  and  contentions  might  have  been  avoided,  I 
shall  have  succeeded  to  any  degree  in  directing  the  minds  of  all  sincere 
Christians  to  contemplate  the  necessity  and  the  practicability  of  realizing 
now  the  great  idea  of  a  general  Evangelical  Union,  far  more  extensive 
ant'  complete  than  could  have  been  either  hoped  for  or  attained  at  the 
per'od  of  the  Westminster  Assembly. 

ToKPHicHEN  Manse, 
Mayy  1843. 


HISTORY 


WESTMINSTER  ASSEMBLY 


CHAPTER    I 


INTRODUCTORY. 


<iuarrel  between  Henry  VIII.  and  the  Pope — Henry  assumes  the  Supre. 
macy  of  the  Church  of  England — Overthrow  of  the  Monastic  System, 
and  partial  Reformation — Six  Articles — Death  of  Henry — Accession 
of  Edward  VI. — Progress  of  Reformation — Homilies — Liturgy — Book 
of  Ordination — Hooper's  Opposition  to  the  Ceremonies — Articles — 
Death  of  Edward — Accession  of  Mary — Restoration  of  Popery — Per- 
secution— Frankfort — Puritans — Death  of  Mary,  and  Accession  of 
Elizabeth — Revived  Supremacy — Check  to  Reformation— Ceremonies 
— Convocation  of  1562,  with  which  all  Reformation  ceased— General 
view  of  the  Puritan  Controversy — Harsh  conduct  of  Parker — The  Pu- 
ritans begin  to  form  a  separate  Body — Their  Opinions — Imprisoned — 
Parliament  attempts  to  interfere— The  Puritans  associate  for  mutual 
Instruction — Form  a  Presbytery — The  Queen  and  Grindal — Rise  of 
the  Brownists — Whitgift — Increased  Severity — Bancroft's  jure  divino 
Prelacy — Martin  Mar-Prelate  Tracts — Sabbath  Controversy — Death 
of  Elizabeth,  and  Accession  of  James — Hampton  Court  Conference — 
Opinion  of  the  Judges  on  the  Power  of  the  High  Commission— Rise  of 
the  Independents — The  Book  of  Sports — Resistance  to  Political  Ty- 
ranny— Combination — Death  of  James,  and  Accession  of  Charles — 
Contests  with  Parliament — Laud — Contest  with  Scotland — The  Long 
Parliament — Impeachment  of  Strafford  and  Laud — Smectymnuus — The 
Army  Plot — Incident — Irish  Massacre — Remonstrance — Protestation 
of  the  Bishops — Abolition  of  the  Hierarchy — Intercourse  with  Scot- 
land— Ordinance  calling  an  Assembly  of  Divines — Summary. 

The  remark  has  frequently  been  made,  accompanied  with 
expressions  of  surprise  and  regret,  that  no  separate  histori- 
cal account  of  the  Westminster  Assembly  of  Divines  has 
yet  been  written.  Every  person  who  has  directed  his 
attention  to  the  events  of  the  seventeenth  century,  whe- 
ther with  regard  to  their  civil  or  their  religious  aspect, 
has  felt  that  it  was  impossible  fully  to  understand  either 
the  one  or  the  other  line  of  study,  without  taking  into 
2 


14<  HISTORY    OF    THE 

view  the  character  of  the  Westminster  Assembly,  the 
purpose  for  which  it  met,  and  the  result  of  its  deliberations. 
Yet,  notwithstanding  this  universally  felt  necessity,  the 
subject  has  never  received  an  adequate  investigation,  and 
consequently  still  remains  in  such  obscurity  as  renders-  it 
exposed  to  every  kind  of  misrepresentation.  Some  have 
regarded  it  as  comparatively  an  isolated  event,  not  very 
influential  on  those  around  it,  and  serving  chiefly  to  dis- 
play, in  a  combined  form,  the  characters  of  the  men  and 
measures  of  those  times ;  others  have  viewed  it  as  the 
abortive  attempt  of  a  parcel  of  narrow-minded  and  yet 
ambitious  fanatics,  serving  to  reveal  their  dangerous  pre- 
tensions, and  then,  by  its  failure,  exposing  them  to 
des-^rved  ridicule.  The  mere  student  of  civil  history  will 
doubtless  see  little  in  it  to  attract  his  notice,  engrossed, 
as  his  attention  will  be,  by  the  schemes  of  politicians  and 
the  din  of  arms  ;  while,  on  the  other  hand,  the  mere 
theologian  will  generally  be  little  disposed  to  regard  any- 
thing about  it,  except  its  productions.  But  the  man  who 
penetrates  a  little  deeper  into  the  nature  of  those  unre- 
vealed  but  powerful  influences  which  move  a  nation's 
mind,  and  mould  its  destinies,  will  be  ready  to  direct  his 
attention  more  profoundly  to  the  objects  and  delibera- 
tions of  an  Assembly  which  met  at  a  moment  so  critical, 
and  was  composed  of  the  great  master-minds  of  the  age  ; 
and  the  theologian  who  has  learned  to  view  religion  as 
the  vital  principle  of  human  nature,  equally  in  nations 
and  in  the  individual  man,  will  not  easily  admit  the  weak 
idea,  that  such  an  Assembly  could  have  been  an  iso- 
lated event,  but  will  be  disposed  earnestly  to  inquire  what 
led  to  its  meeting,  and  what  important  consequences  fol- 
lowed. And  although  the  subject  has  not  hitherto  been 
investijrated  with  such  a  view,  it  may,  we  trust,  be  possible 
to  pro^e,  that  it  was  the  most  important  event  in  the  cen- 
tury in  which  it  occurred  ;  and  that  it  has  exerted,  and  in 
all  probability  will  yet  exert,  a  far  more  wide  and  perma 
ncnt  influence  upon  both  the  civil  and  the  religious  historj 
of  mankind  than  has  generally  been  even  imagined. 

Intitnately  connected  as  the  Westminster  Assembly  was 
both  with  the  civil  and  the  religious  history  of  the  two 
kingdoms  of  England  and  Scotland,  it  will  be  absolutely 
pecessary   to    give   a   preliminary  outline  of   the    leading 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBLY.  15 

events  in  both  countries,  from  the  time  of  the  Reforma- 
tion till  the  meetiniT  of  the  Assembly,  in  order  that  a  cleai 
conception  may  be  obtained  of  the  cause  of  its  meeting-, 
tiie  circumstances  in  which  it  met,  and  the  object  which  it 
was  intended  to  accomplish.  We  shall  then  be  in  a  fit 
condition  to  investip:ate  the  proceedings  of  the  Assembly 
itself,  to  understand  their  true  character,  to  mark  their 
direct  bearing,  and  to  trace  their  more  remote  results. 

The  circumstances  that  led  to  the  disagreement  between 
Henry  VIII.  and  the  Pope  are  so  w«ll  known,  that  it  is 
unnecessary  to  do  more  than  merely  allude  to  them. 
Whether  Henry  actually  began  to  entertain  conscientious 
scruples  respecting  the  lawfulness  of  his  marriage  with 
Katherine  of  Arragon,  his  brother  Arthur's  widow,  before 
he  became  enamored  of  Anne  Boleyn,  or  whether  his 
incipient  affection  for  that  lady  induced  him  to  devise  a 
method  of  being  released  from  his  wife,  is  an  inquiry  of  no 
great  moment  in  itself,  except  as  to  its  bearing  on  the 
character  of  the  monarch.  Suffice  it  to  state,  that  the 
king  consulted  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  and  required 
him  to  procure  the  opinions  of  the  bishops  of  England  on 
the  subject.  All,  with  the  exception  of  Fisher,  Bishop  of 
Rochester,  declared  that  in  their  judgment  it  was  an  un- 
lawful marriage.  But  as  a  dispensation  had  been  obtained 
from  the  pope,  before  the  marriage  took  place,  it  became 
necessary  to  procure  a  papal  recognition  of  the  intended 
divorce  ;  which  was  a  matter  of  no  little  difficulty,  both 
because  such  a  measure  would  seem  to  invalidate  a  pre- 
vious papal  bull,  to  the  discredit  of  the  doctrine  of  infalli- 
bility, and  because  there  would  arise  a  serious  question 
respecting  the  legitimacy  of  the  Princess  Mary,  and  offence 
might  be  taken  by  the  King  of  Spain.  All  these  dangers 
were  clearly  seen  by  Cardinal  Wolsey  ;  who,  accordingly, 
without  venturing  directly  to  oppose  the  king's  desires, 
contrived  to  cause  delays,  to  procure  evasive  answers,  and 
to  protract  the  proceedings  by  every  method  which  fear  of 
the  issue  could  prompt  and  deep  craft  could  devise.  At 
length  Cranmer  suggested,  that,  instead  of  a  long  and  fruit- 
less negotiation  at  Rome,  it  would  be  better  to  consult  all 
the  learned  men  and  universities  of  Christendom,  to  ascer- 
tain whether  the  marriage  were  unlawful  in  itself,  by  virtue 
of  any   divine   precept  ;  for   if  that  were   proved,  then   it 


16  HISTORY    OF    THE 

would  follow,  that  the  pope's  dispensation  could  be  of  iic 
force  to  make  that  lawful  which  God  has  declared  unlaw 
ful.*  When  the  king  heard  of  this  suggestion  he  imme- 
diately adopted  it,  sent  for  Cranmer,  received  him  into 
favor,  and  placed  such  confidence  in  his  honor,  integrity 
and  judgment,  that  it  was  never  afterwards  thoroughly 
shaken,  either  by  the  artifices  of  enemies,  or  the  varying 
moods  of  the  capricious  sovereign  himself. 

Cranmer  prosecuted  the  scheme  which  he  had  suggested 
so  successfully  that  he  procured,  both  from  the  English 
universities,  and  from  nearly  all  the  learned  men  in  Eu- 
rope, answers,  to  the  effect  that  the  king's  marriage  was 
contrary  to  the  law  of  God.  These  answers  were  laid  be- 
fore the  Parliament,  which  met  in  January,  1531,  and  as- 
sented to  by  both  Houses,  as  also  by  the  Convocation  of 
the  Clergy,  which  was  met  at  the  same  time.  Still  the 
Pope  had  not  consented,  and  the  hostility  between  him  and 
Henry  was  necessarily  increased  by  what  had  taken  place 
regarding  the  proposed  divorce.  Henry  was  not  disposed 
to  pause  now,  till  he  should  have  declared  his  power  over 
the  clergy  ;  and  as  they  were  all  implicated  in  some  of 
Wolsey's  proceedings,  which  had  been  declared  to  have 
involved  him  in  a  prczmunire^  they  were  held  to  be  amena- 
ble to  all  its  penalties.  Their  danger  rendered  them  sub- 
missive, and  in  the  convocation  at  Canterbury  a  petition 
was  agreed  upon  to  be  offered  to  the  king,  in  which  he 
was  styled,  "  The  Protector  and  Supreme  Head  of  the 
Church  and  the  clergy  of  England."  Gratified  with  this 
title,  the  king  granted  a  pardon  to  the  clergy ;  but  did  not, 
as  they  had  probably  expected,  permit  it  to  remain  an 
empty  title.  In  May,  1532,  he  informed  the  House  of 
Commons  that  he  had  learned  that  all  the  prelates,  at  their 
consecration,  swore  an  oath  quite  contrary  to  that  which 
they  swore  to  the  crown — so  that  it  seemed  they  were  the 
pope's  subjects  rather  than  his  ;  referring  it  to  their  care 
to  take  such  order  in  it  that  the  king  might  not  be  deluded. 
The  prorogation  of  the  Parliament  prevented  the  immedi- 
ate collision  between  the  civil  and  the  ecclesiastical  pow- 
ers, which  the  investigation  of  that  point  would  have 
caused^  but  it  was   now  abundantly  evident  on   what  the 

*  Burnet's  History  of  the  Reformation,  vol.  i.  p.  125- 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBLV.  '/ 

kino-   bad   bent    bis    mind.      Tbe    question   respecting  the 
pope's  snpremacv  was  now  the  subject  of  inquiry  and  dis- 
cassion  throughout  the  kingdom  ;  and  at  length  it  was  for- 
mally brought  before  Parliament,  and  on  the  20th  of  March, 
l534<-5,  a  bill   was   passed,  abolishing  papal  supremacy  in 
Eno-land,  and  declaring   the  king   to  be  the  Supreme  Head 
of  the  Church  of  England  ;  and  in  the  following  June  a  cir- 
cular letter  was  sent  by  the   king,  not  only  to  all  the  bish- 
ops, but  also  to  all  justices  of  the  peace,  requirmg  the  uni- 
versal promulgation  of  the  decree  respectmg  the  abolition 
of  the  pope's  supremacy  and  the   recognition  of  his  own  ; 
and    empowerincr     the     civil     functionaries     to    ascertain 
whether  the  cleriry  did  their  duty  sincerely.       bo  delight- 
ed was  King  Henry  with  his  title  of  Supreme  Head  of  the 
Church,  that  he  caused    it  to   be  enacted   that  it  should  be 
for   ever  joined   to   the   other  titles   of  the  crown,  and  be 
reckoned  one  of  them  ;  and  even   caused  a  seal  to    be  cut 
for  public  use  in  his  new   ecclesiastical   office  ;  and    wneu 
directincr  a  vishation  of  the  whole  clergy  of  England,  dated 
the  18th  of  September,  1535,  added  these  words :  \  Under 
our  seal,  that  we  use  in   ecclesiastical   matters,  which   we 
have  ordered  to  be  hereunto  appended."! 

It  will  at  once  be  seen,  that  the  title  of  Supreme  Head  ot 

the  Church,  and  the  power  in  ecclesiastical  matters  which 

arose  from  it,  was  claimed  by  Henry  not  as  the  necessary 

means  for  promoting  reformation,  nor   from  any  religious 

conviction  that   the  pope's   assumption  of  it  was   m   itselt 

sinful ;  but  solely  from  the  desire  of  rescuing  himselt  trom 

any  control,  and  for  the  purpose  of  possessing,  m  his  owui 

person,  the  most   full   and   absolute    powder  that   could  be 

imagined.     And  it  rendered  it  at  once  a  matter  o(    utter 

impossibility  for  the  Church  of  England  to   prosecute    its 

own  reformation  according  to  the  deliberate  judgment  ot 

its  most  enlightened  members,   w^hatever   might   be   their 

•  opinion  of  the  requirements  of  the  Word  of  God       io  this 

fatal  dogma  of  the  king's  supremacy  and   headship  o     the 

Church  of  England  may   be   directly   traced  nearly  all  the 

corruptions   of  that  Church,  and  nearly  all   the  subsequent 

civil  calamities  of  the  British  Isles.     For  it  would  not  be 

difficult  to  prove   that  there  can  be  no  security  for  either 

•  Burnet's  Hist.  Ref.,  vol.  iii.  p.  144.        f  Ibid.,  vol.  iii.  p.  152. 

2* 


18  Hi?TOKY    OF    THE 

civil  or  religious  liberty  in  any  country  where  the  supreme 
civil  and  ecclesiastical  jurisdictions  are  both  possessed  by 
the  same  ruling  power.  It  matters  little  whether  the  ruliiig 
power  be  ecclesiastical,  holding  the  civil  subordinate  to  it, 
as  the  Papacy  j  or  civil,  holding  the  ecclesiastical  subordi- 
nate, as  in  the  case  of  Henry  and  his  successors;  for  in 
either  case  the  result  is  a  despotism,  under  which  the  peo- 
ple must  sink  into  utter  degradation,  or  against  which  they 
are  provoked,  from  time  to  time,  to  rise  in  all  the  danger- 
ous fierceness  of  revolutionary  convulsion.  But  it  is 
enough  merely  to  suggest  this  view  at  present ;  it  will 
demand  more  particular  examination  in  futm-e  stages  of  our 
inquiries. 

Almost  the  first  public  ase  made  by  the  king  of  his 
acknowledged  supremacy  in  religion,  w^as  to  send  Cranmer, 
now  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  on  a  visitation  of  the  mo- 
nasteries throughout  the  kingdom.  It  was  no  difiicult  mat- 
ter to  convict  these  popish  institutions  of  such  crimes  and 
abominations  as  are  not  fit  to  be  mentioned,  "  equal,"  says 
Burnet,  "  to  any  that  were  in  Sodom ;''  so  that  their  sup- 
pression was  but  the  sweeping  away  of  a  great  moral  nui- 
sance, too  loathsome  any  longer  to  be  endured.  It  served, 
at  the  same  time,  as  a  measure  by  Vvhich  the  king's  cof- 
fers were  replenished,  some  of  his  favorites  enriched, 
and  the  better  part  of  the  nation  gratified  by  the  removal 
of  a  system  of  enormities  which  had  been  long  regarded 
with  extreme  detestation.  About  the  same  time  "it  was 
resolved  that  the  Bible  should  be  translated  into  Enghsh, 
and  published  for  the  instruction  of  the  community;  though 
this  was  strenuously  resisted  by  a  large  proportion  of  the 
clergy,  and  carried  only  by  the  influence  of  Cranmer  and 
the  queen.  The  fall  of  the  queen,  which  took  place  soon 
after,  threatened  to  retard  the  progress  of  refoi-mation,  and 
the  pope  attempted  a  reconciliation  with  the  king.  But 
Henry  had  no  inclination  to  subject  himself  again  to  papal, 
control ;  and  following  Cranmer's  advice,  he  proceeded  to 
make  further  changes.  In  the  year  1530  the  Convocation 
W' ere  induced  to  agree  to  certain  articles  of  religion,  which 
were  accordingly  promulgated  on  the  royal  autbority.  In 
these  articles,  the  standards  of  faith  were  declared  to  be, 
— the  Bible,  the  Apostolic,  Nicene,  and  Athanasian  creeds, 
and  the  decrees  of  the  first  four  general  Councils,  without 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBLY.  19 

rejrard  to  tradition  or  the  decrees  of  the  Church  ;  and  the 
doctrine  of  justilication  was  declared  to  '' sio^nify  remis- 
sion of  sins,  and  acceptation  into  the  favor  of  God,  tliat  is 
to  say,  a  perfect  renovation  in  Christ ;"  but  auricular  con- 
fession was  held  to  be  necessary,  the  corporal  presence 
of  Christ  in  the  sacrament  was  maintained,  doing  reverence 
to  imaties  and  praying  to  saints  were  approved  of,  and 
various  other  corruptions  and  mere  ceremonial  observances 
were  left  untouched.*  This  limited  reformation  gave  little 
satisfaction  to  any,  one  party  thinking  it  too  much,  and  the 
other  too  little  ;  yet  it  tended  to  encourage  those  who 
wished  reform,  with  the  hope  that  what  was  thus  begun 
would  be  gradually  and  thoroughly  accomplished. 

[1539.]   In  the  year  1538,  the  English  translation  of  the 
Bible  was  published    and  injunctions  were  given  to  all  the 
clergy  to  procure  these  Bibles,  one   for  each   Church,  and 
to  encourage  all  persons  to  peruse  them  ;  condemning,  at 
the  same  time,  the  worship  of  images,  and  permitting  the 
prayers  to  saints  to  be  omitted.     But  while  the  reformers 
were  rejoicing   in  this  apparently   rapid  progress  of  the 
good  work,  their  hopes  were  suddenly  cast  to  the  ground, 
and  their   prospects   darkened.     The  very   next   year   the 
kincr,  on  the  pretext  of  putting  an  end   to  controversies  in 
religion,  required  a  committee  to  be  appointed  for  the  pur- 
pose  of  drawing  up   articles  of  agreement,   to  which   all 
mio^ht  consent.     The  committee  could  not  agree,  and  the 
subject   was  brought  before  the   House    of   Lords  by  the 
Duke  of  Norfolk,    who  named  six  articles  for  discussion. 
Notwithstanding  the  opposition  of  Cranmer,  these  articles 
were  passed,  and   all  the  kingdom  commanded  to   receive 
them,  the  penalty  of   opposition  being,  imprisonment,  for- 
feiture of  property,  or  death  as  heretics.     They  contained 
the  following  tenets  ; — The  real  presence  in  the  sacrament, 
communion  in   one  kind   only,  the  celibacy  of  the  priest- 
hood, that  vows  of   chastity  made  by  either  sex  should  be 
observed,   that  private    masses  should   be  continued,  and 
that  auricular  confession  was  necessary,  and  should  be  re- 
tained in  the  Church. f     By  this  act  it  was  rendered  abun- 
dantly evident,  that  little  of  popery  had  been  removed  but 

•  Burnet'3  Hist.  Ref.,  vol.  i.  pp.  333-338.     f  Ibid.,  vol.  i.  pp.  400, 40). 


20 


HISTORY'    OF    THS 


the  name ;  or  rather,  that  England  had  obtained,  instead 
of  an  ecclesiastical,  a  royal  pope.  Yet,  with  remarkable 
inconsistency,  or  at  least  want  of  penetration,  the  king 
very  soon  after  consented  to  an  act  permitting  private 
persons  to  purchase  Bibles,  and  keep  them  in  their  own 
possession.  The  short-sighted  despot  did  not  perceive 
that  the  private  use  of  the  Scriptures  would  soon  teach  his 
people  the  right  of  private  judgment  also  in  matters  of  reli- 
gion, which  all  his  boasted  supremacy  would  not  long  be 
able  to  control. 

The  fall  of  Cromwell,  caused  in  a  great  measure  by  the 
intrigues  of  the  popish  party,  allowed  them  to  regain  con- 
siderable ascendency,  and  retarded  the  progress  of  refor- 
mation, though  it  still  continued  slowly  to  gain  ground. 
An  attempt  was  made  by  the  popish  bishops  to  procure  the 
suppression  of  the  Bible,  on  the  ostensible  ground  of  its 
being  an  inaccurate  translation.  This,  however,  they 
did  not  obtain ;  but  an  act  was  made  "  about  religion," 
the  effect  of  which  was,  to  empower  the  king  to 
confirm,  rescind,  or  change  any  act,  or  any  provision  in 
any  act,  that  treated  of  religion.  A  more  complete  and  ar- 
bitrary supremacy  in  all  matters  of  religion,  than  was  now 
possessed  by  Henry,  it  is  almost  impossible  to  imagine. 
And  the  effect  was  correspondent  to  the  cause  ;  for  the 
king,  guided  alone  by  his  own  fierce  and  capricious  will, 
was  almost  equally  hostile  to  both  parties,  popish  and  re- 
forming, inflicting  the  extreme  penalty  of  death  upon  either 
with  indiscriminate  severity.  But  the  death  of  the  king 
rescued  the  nation  from  intolerable  oppression,  and  gave 
opportunity  for  the  more  earnest  and  successful  prosecu- 
tion of  the  great  work  of  reformation  under  his  young  and 
amiable  successor. 

[1547.]  No  sooner  had  a  suitable  arrangement  of  civil 
affairs  been  effected  by  the  regency,  than  Cranmer,  sup- 
ported by  the  Protector  Somerset,  and  countenanced  by 
the  young  king,  Edward  VI.,  resumed  the  important  duty 
of  prosecuting  the  reformation  of  the  Church.  By  an  act 
of  the  preceding  reign  the  proclamation  of  the  king,  or  of 
his  counsellors  if  under  age,  was  of  sufficient  authority  to 
enable  them  to  proceed,  as  if  by  act  of  Parliament,  in  cases 
not  otherwise  pr-^vided  for,  so  as  not  to  encroach  on  the 
just  liberties  of  the  subject,  or  to  interfere  with  other  acts 


Wr.STMKNSTER    ASSEMBLY.  21 

or  proclamations.  They  accordingly  sent  out  visiters  over 
England,  which  was  for  that  purpose  divided  into  six  cir 
cuits.  The  duty  of  those  visitors  was  to  inquire  into  all 
Church  matters,  to  redress  all  wrongs,  and  remove  all 
abuses,  and  particularly  to  ascertain  the  sufficiency  or  the 
reverse  of  the  clergy  throughout  the  country.  Along  with 
these  visitors,  they  sent  the  most  eminent  preachers  that 
could  be  found,  to  communicate  sound  and  full  instruction 
in  the  true  principles  of  religion  to  both  clergy  and  people. 
And  to  remedy  the  deplorable  ignorance  which  everywhere 
prevailed  among  the  clergy,  some  were  appointed  to  com- 
pile homilies,  explanatory  of  the  most  important  doctrines 
and  duties  of  Christianity.  Several  of  these  homilies  con- 
tain very  clear  and  forcible  statements  and  elucidations  of 
sacred  truth,  others  are  less  valuable,  and  some  are  not  a 
little  erroneous  in  several  respects.  They  were,  however, 
well  htted  to  meet  the  necessities  of  an  ignorant  clergy 
and  an  uninstructevl  people  ;  but  it  could  scarcely  have 
been  dreamed  by  Cranmer  that  the  method  devised  by  him 
for  the  remedy  of  a  disease  would  be  retained  for  its  per- 
petuation,— that  because  he  provided  sermons  and  prayers 
for  those  who  could  neither  preach  nor  pray,  that  would 
come  to  be  regarded  as  a  precedent  of  force  enough  to 
prevent  learned  and  pious  men  from  preparing  sermons 
and  prayers  for  themselves. 

[1548.]  The  next  reforming  step  was  an  act  permitting 
the  communion  to  be  received  in  both  kinds.  Then  fol- 
lowed another,  prohibiting  private  masses.  A  catechism 
was  soon  afterw^ards  prepared  by  Cranmer.  And  proceed- 
ing to  investigate  the  offices,  or  ritual  of  the  Church,  it  was 
at  length  determined  that  a  new  Liturgy  should  be  pre- 
pared, as  the  best  method  of  getting  quit  of  the  supersti- 
tions by  which  that  in  present  use  was  disfigured.  This 
Liturgy  was  confirmed  by  act  of  Parliament,  in  the  year 
I.04-8-9,  and  its  use  commanded  on  the  ultimate  penalty  of 
imprisonment  for  life.*  About  the  same  time,  there  were 
several  severe  proceedings  against  Anabaptists  and  other 
sectaries,  one  of  whom,  Joan  of  Kent,  was  condemned  to 
the  stake  ;  but  the  mild  and  gentle  young  king  could  not 
be  induced  to  sign  the   warrant  for  her  execution  without 

•  Burnet's  Hist.  Ref.,  vol.  ii.  pp.  116,  127 


22  HISTORY    OF    THE 

che  urgent  persuasions  of  Cranmer  himself,  who,  in  dm 
instance,  as  also  in  those  of  Lambert,  and  Anne  Askew, 
in  the  preceding  reign,  forgot  the  spirit  of  that  gentle  and 
giacious  religion  of  which  he  was  so  eminent  a  teacher 
and  reformer.* 

[1550-1.]  The  Book  of  Ordinations  was  next  made  and 
ratified,  which  had  another  tendency  to  give  a  character  of 
fixed  rigidity  to  the  Church  of  England.  The  evil  conse- 
quence of  undue  strictness  in  matters  of  mere  form  and 
ceremony  was  soon  apparent,  when  Hooper  refused  to  be 
consecrated  as  a  bishop  in  the  Episcopal  vestments.  This 
simple-minded  and  sincere  reformer  condemned  these  vest- 
ments as  human  inventions,  brought  in  by  tradition  or  cus- 
tom, and  not  suitable  to  the  simplicity  of  the  Christian  re- 
ligion.f  Few  impartial  persons  will  doubt  that  he  was 
perfectly  in  the  right,  both  in  point  of  fact  and  in  propriety 
of  feeling  ;  for  no  one  can  deny  the  human  origin  of  such 
matters,  and  few  will  regard  them  as  conferring  dignity  on 
the  Gospel,  so  glorious  in  its  divine  simplicity.  But  he 
was  to  learn  one  direct  consequence  of  the  sovereign's 
supremacy,  namely,  that  there  was  to  be  an  order  of  the 
clergy  decked  with  courtly  adornments,  and  in  that  respect 
at  least  "  conformed  to  the  world,"  contrary  to  the  apos- 
tolic precept.  A  great  and  wide-spread  controversy  arose 
on  this  subject.  Correspondence  was  held  with  foreign 
Churches  and  divines,  with  the  view  of  ascertaining  their 
opinion  respecting  the  lawfulness  of  obeying  the  civil 
magistrate's  order  to  use  such  vestments  in  the  worship  of 
God.  Various  opinions  were  given,  many  of  the  best  and 
wisest  men  being  extremely  grieved  that  dangerous  dis- 
putes should  arise  about  matters  not  in  their  own  nature  of 
vital  importance.  Bucer  recommended  compliance  ;  but 
wished  these  vestments  disused,  as  connected  with  super- 
stition, and  a  more  complete  reformation  established.  At 
length  a  compromise  was  effected.  Hooper  was  required 
to  wear  the  episcopal  vestments  when  he  was  consecrated, 
and  when  he  preached  before  the  king,  or  in  a  cathedral ; 
bit  was  permitted  to  lay  them  aside  on  other  occasions. 
This  slight  matter  was  a  sufficient  indication,  that  the  re* 
ormation  was  to  be  stopped  whenever  it  had  reached  as 

•  Burnet's  Hist.  Ref.,  vol.  ii.  p.  179.  f  Ibid.,  vol.  ii.  p.  245,  et  seq. 


WEST.Ml.NSTRR    ASSE.MDLY.  23 

far  as  the  king  and  court  thoucrht  proper  ;  and  that  those 
who  wished  for  further  reformation,  and  aimec.  at  again 
reahzing  primitive  simplicity  and  purity,  w^ould  be  con- 
strained to  pause,  and  painfully  to  submit  to  what  they 
could  not  remedy.  It  might  have  been  regarded  as  of 
little  consequence  what  vestments  were  worn  in  public 
worship ;  but  it  was  a  matter  of  grave  and  serious  import 
to  find,  that  conscientious  feelings  in  affairs  of  religion 
were  to  be  overborne  by  the  dictate  of  the  civil  magistrate. 
From  this  time  forward  there  began  to  be  a  party  in  Eng- 
land who  longed  for  a  more  complete  reformation  than  had 
been  or  could  be  obtained,  although  it  was  not  till  a  con- 
siderably later  period  that  this  party  attracted  public  atten- 
tion under  a  distinctive  name. 

[1552.]  In  the  year  1532,  the  alterations  which  had 
been  made  in  the  book  of  Common  Prayer  by  the  reformers 
during  the  course  of  the  preceding  year,  were  ratified  by 
act  of  Parliament,  and  ordered  to  be  universally  employed, 
under  the  penalties  by  which  the  previous  Liturgy  had 
been  enforced.  In  the  same  year  the  Articles  of  Religion 
were  prepared,  chiefly  by  Cranmer  and  Ridley,  and  pub- 
lished by  the  king's  authority,  a  short  time  before  his 
lamented  death.*  A  book  was  also  drawn  up  for  giving 
rules  to  the  ecclesiastical  courts  in  all  matters  of  govern- 
ment and  discipline  ;  but  this  was  never  ratified,  as  the 
king's  decease  took  place  before  it  was  fully  prepared. 
This  was,  perhaps,  the  u;reatest  misfortune  that  befell  the 
Church  of  England,  in  consequence  of  the  premature  death 
of  Edward,  as  it  was  thereby  left  totally  without  govern- 
ment or  discipline,  such  as,  though  limited  by  the  acknow- 
ledged regal  supremacy,  might  yet  have  been,  in  the  first 
instance,  administered  by  its  own  courts.  Hence  it  became 
impossible  for  the  Church  of  England  to  exercise  any 
direct  influence  in  checking  immorality,  reforming  abuses, 
or  even  in  preserving  its  own  most  sacred  ordinances  from 
profanation.  Even  Burnet  laments  its  want  of  the  power 
to  exercise  discipline,  and  suggests  the  desirableness  that 
the  power  of  excommunication  might  yet  be  brought  into 
the  Church. f  Such,  however,  was  the  inevitable  conse- 
quence of   making    the    king    the   Supreme  Head  of  the 

•  Burnet's  Hist.  Ref.,  vol.  iii.  pp.  308-310.         f  Ibid.,  vol.  ii.  p.  326. 


24  HISTORY    OF    THE 

Church,  rendering  it  necessarily  impossible  for  the  Church 
to  reform  itself  beyond  what  he  or  his  state  advisers  might 
choose  to  permit. 

[1553.]  The  truth  of  this  was  immediately  made  appa- 
rent on  the  accession  of  Queen  Mary,  in  the  year  1553. 
An  early  act  of  her  sovereignty  was  the  issuing  of  a  pro- 
clamation, in  which  she  declared  her  adherence  to  the 
religion  that  she  had  professed  from  her  infancy,  disclaim- 
ing the  intention  of  compelling  her  subjects,  till  public 
order  should  be  taken  in  the  matter  by  common  consent  ; 
and,  in  the  meantime,  straitly  charging  that  none  should 
preach,  or  expound  Scripture,  or  print  any  books  or  plays, 
without  her  special  license.  The  deprived  popish  bishops 
were  speedily  restored  to  their  sees,  and  the  reformed 
bishops,  some  sent  to  prison  at  once,  and  others  thrust  out 
of  the  House  of  Lords,  because  they  refused  to  reverence 
the  mass  at  its  opening.  The  laws  passed  by  King  Ed- 
ward concerning  religion  were  repealed  ;  and.  a  negotia 
tion  commenced  for  procuring  a  reconciliation  with  the 
pope  The  mass  was  everywhere  resumed — the  laws 
against  heresy  revived — and  every  step  taken  for  bringing 
the  nation  once  more  under  the  degrading  thraldom  of 
Popery,  with  all  possible  expedition.  All  this  was  done 
directly  by  the  authority  of  the  queen,  as  Supreme  Head 
of  the  Church  of  England  ;  for  this  title  she  took  care  to 
retain  and  enforce  at  the  commencement  of  her  reig 
though  it  was  afterwards  disused.  Indeed,  she  could  noi 
so  readily  have  accomplished  her  purpose  without  the 
power  which  this  title  was  admitted  to  confer  ;  so  fatally 
\\ms  it  productive  of  evil,  so  soon  had  it  ceased,  to  be  avail- 
able for  good,  even  when  held  by  the  pious  Edward. 

But  it  is  quite  unnecessary  to  relate  the  events  that  suc- 
cessively followed,  and  to  sketch  even  the  outlines  of  the 
fierce  persecution  which  characterized  the  reign  of  a  queen 
so  well  known  by  the  fearfully  emphatic  title  of  "The 
Bloody  Mary."  Life  alone  was  wanting  to  her  to  have 
completely  overthro\vTi  the  Reformation  in  England,  and 
to  have  placed  again  the  kingdom  beneath  the  Romish 
yoke.  And  it  deserves  to  be  carefully  remarked,  that  this 
dread  consummation  was  so  nearly  accomplished  almost 
entirely  by  two  conjunct  influences — by  the  queen's  eccle» 
Biastical   supremacy,   and   by   the   wealth  and  consequent 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBLY.  25 

power  of  the  prelates.  The  tendency  of  the  latter  element 
had  been  foreseen  by  some,  as  appears  from  a  letter  writ- 
ten to  the  Protector  Somerset  by  Sir  Philip  Hobby  ;  in 
which,  after  suggesting  the  wisdom  of  appointing  the  godly 
bishops  an  honest  and  competent  living,  and  taking  from 
them  the  rest  of  those  worldly  possessions  and  dignities 
which  tend  to  prevent  the  right  discharge  of  their  office, 
he  adds,  "  The  papists  say,  They  doubt  not  but  my  lords 
the  bishops,  being  a  great  number  of  stout  and  well  learned 
men,  will  well  enough  weigh  against  their  adversaries,  and 
maintain  still  their  whole  estate  ;  which  coming  to  pass, 
they  have  good  hope  that  in  time  these  princely  pillars  will 
well  enough  resist  this  fury,  and  bring  all  things  again  into 
the  old  order."*  This  shrewd  prediction  was  wellnigh  ful- 
filled in  "Bloody  Mary's"  days;  an  approximation  was 
made  towards  it  again  under  the  management  of  Laud ; 
and  it  is  possible  that  a  similar  peril  may  once  more  arise. 

Reference  has  been  already  made  to  the  opposition 
which  Hooper  offered  to  the  episcopal  vestments,  and  other 
(inimportant  and  superstitious  ceremonies,  as  probably 
exhibiting  the  very  origin  of  what  afterwards  became  the 
great  Puritan  party  in  England.  Another  event  must  also 
be  mentioned,  which  certainly  very  much  increased,  and 
has  by  many  been  thought  to  have  first  caused  that  unpro- 
pitious  schism.  During  the  persecution  in  the  reign  of 
Mary,  many  Protestants,  both  lay  and  clerical,  sought  safety 
by  flight  to  the  continent.  Of  these  a  considerable  body 
took  up  their  residence  at  Frankfort,  while  others  went 
to  Strasburgh,  Zurich,  and  Basle.  The  Frankfort  exiles  at 
first  entered  into  communion  with  a  congregation  of  French 
Protestants,  on  the  agreement  that  they  should  subscribe 
the  French  Confession  of  Faith,  and  not  insist  upon  retain- 
in/if  the  forms  and  ceremonies  of  the  English  Liturgy. 

For  a  time  all  went  on  in  peace  and  harmony,  under 
three  pastors,  chosen  by  the  congregation,  of  whom  John 
Knox  was  one  ;  but  the  English  having  invited  some  of 
their  countrymen  at  Strasburgh  and  Zurich  to  come  and 
join  them,  they  replied  that  they  could  not  do  so,  unless 
they  would  conform  strictly  and  entirely  to  the  religious 
service  appointed  by  King  Edward.     The  Frankfort  con- 


•  Burnet's  Hist.  Rcf.,  vol.  iii.  p.  280 
3 


26  HISTORY    OF    THE 

gregation  refused  to  do  so ;  stating,  that  if  the  Strasburgh 
divines  had  no  other  views  but  to  reduce  the  congregation 
to  King  Edward's  form,  and  to  establish  popish  ceremo- 
nies, they  had  better  stay  away.  The  Frankfort  brethren 
consuhed  Calvin,  and  other  leading  continental  reformers, 
who  all  censured  the  English  Liturgy,  thought  it  more  be- 
coming godly  ministers  of  Christ  to  aim  at  something  bet- 
ter and  purer,  and  expressed  surprise  that  they  were  so 
fond  of  '^  Popish  dregs."  The  controversy  might  probably 
have  gone  no  further,  but  for  the  inopportune  arrival  at 
Frankfort  of  Dr.  Cox,  who  had  been  tutor  to  King  Edward, 
and  possessed  great  influence  among  his  countrymen.  He 
at  once  broke  through  the  whole  previous  agreement,  in- 
terrupted the  usual  service,  by  answering  aloud  after  the 
minister,  and,  by  private  intriguing,  got  the  majority  t" 
consent  to  his  aggressive  innovations.  The  injured  party 
applied  to  the  magistrates,  who  gave  order  that  the  ori- 
ginal agreement  should  be  observed,  threatening  to  shut 
up  the  place  of  worship  if  this  command  were  disobeyed. 
With  a  baseness  which  has  few  equals,  Cox  and  his  party 
went  privately  to  the  magistrates,  and  accused  Knox  of 
treason  against  the  Emperor  of  Germany,  his  son  Phi- 
lip, and  Queen  Mary  of  England  ;  founding  this  charge  on 
some. expressions  in  his  small  treatise,  entitled,  "  Admo- 
nition to  England."  The  magistrates  were  in  great  per- 
plexity ;  for  though  they  utterly  disapproved  of  the  con- 
duct of  Cox  and  the  informers,  they  were  afraid  to  offend 
the  emperor's  council.  In  this  dilemma  they  advised  John 
Knox  to  withdraw  from  Frankfort,  for  his  own  safety,  and 
for  the  sake  of  peace.  He  consented,  and  withdrew, 
amidst  the  complaints  and  tears  of  his  attached  friends.  Fol- 
lowing up  his  disgraceful  victory.  Cox  falsely  represented 
to  the  magistrates  that  the  English  Liturgy  was  now  uni 
versally  acceptable  to  the  congregation,  and  procured  an 
order  for  its  unlimited  use.  He  then  abrogated  the  code 
of  discipline,  procured  the  nppointment  of  a  bishop,  and 
rejoiced  in  having  now  "  the  face  of  an  English  Church." 
Thus,  by  intolerance,  treachery,  and  despotism,  they  suc- 
ceeded in  overthrowing  a  Church  whose  scriptural  simpli- 
city and  purity  they  might  have  rejoiced  to  imitate,  and  in 
setting  up  human  inventions,  in  which  pride  and  selfish- 
ness might  glory  ;  giving,  likewise,  an  oniinous  intimation 


WESTMI.NSTF.R    iJSSEMBLY.  'i 

of  the  spirit  likely  to  prevail  in  such  a  Church  as  their;, 
ethould  it  regain  the  ascendency,  and  become  established 
in  Ennjlard."  For  in  this  instance  they  had  not  to  plead, 
as  in  the  case  of  Hooper,  respect  for  the  civil  authority  by 
which  vestment  and  ceremonies  were  enjoined,  the  Frank- 
fort mngistrates  having  actually  discountenanced  them  j 
but  it  was  with  them  as  it  ever  is  when  man  mingles  his 
own  devices  with  God's  appointments — to  his  own  vain 
fancies  he  clings  Avith  desperate  and  fierce  tenacity,  while 
he  lays  hold  weakly  and  loosely  on  the  unchanging  laws 
and  principles  of  divine  revelation. "* 

[1558.]  Elizabeth,  upon  her  accession  to  the  throne, 
found  herself  in  a  situation  of  considerable  difficulty- 
threatened  with  foreign  wars,  and  her  subjects  divided, 
anxious,  and  alarmed,  on  the  all-important  subject  of  re- 
ligion. Her  wisest  counsellors  advised  her  first  to  settle 
the  relations  of  the  country  with  foreign  states,  and  then 
to  proceed  with  what  religious  reformation  might  be  ne- 
cessary. There  was  also  another  reason  for  this  course  : 
Elizabeth,  on  her  accession  to  the  throne,  sent  intimation 
of  that  event  to  the  pope,  and  waited  an  answer  from 
Rome  before  declaring  her  purposes  with  regard  to  reli- 
gion. That  answer  declared  her  illegitimate  and  com- 
manded her  to  abandon  the  throne,  and  submit  to  the  will 
of  the  Roman  pontiff.  This  insolence  determined  her  to 
the  support  of  the  Protestant  cau?e.  To  prevent  disputes 
in  the  meantime,  a  proclamation  was  issued,  prohibiting  all 
preachinor,  and  requiring  that  nothing  should  be  done  in 
public  worship,  but  the  reading  of  the  Gospel  and  Epistle 
for  the  day,  the  Lord's  Prayer,  the  Creed,  and  the  Ten 
Commandments,  till  proper  arrangements  should  be  made 
and  further  instructions  given.  Parliament  met  in  January, 
15[)9,  and  proceeded  with  alacrity  to  the  discharge  of  its 
duties.  The  Act  of  Supremacy,  vdiich  had  fallen  into 
abeyance  during  the  later  period  of  Mary's  reign,  was  re- 
enacted,  restoring  to  the  Crown  complete  supremacy  in 
all  causes,  civil  and  ecclesiastical,  as  it  had  been  in  the 
times  of  Henry  VIII.  and  Edward  VLj     To   this  bill  seve- 

*  M'Crie's  Life  of  Knox,  pp.  86-97  ;  Neale's  History  of  the  Puritans, 
vol.  i.  pp.  76-82. 

t  Irx  the  queen's  injunctions,  subsequently  issued,  an  explanation  was 
given  of  the  oath  of  supremacy  ;  in  which  her  majesty  declared  that  she 


28  HISTORY    OF    THE 

ral  others  were  annexed,  reviving  various  acts  in  the 
reign  of  Henry,  and  repealing  those  of  Mary ;  so  that,  by 
this  one  enactment,  the  external  policy  of  the  Church  was 
restored  to  almost  the  very  same  condition  in  which  it  had 
been  at  the  death  of  King  Edward.  One  proviso  in  this 
act,  added  for  the  purpose  of  enabling  the  queen  to  exe- 
cute her  supremacy,  empowered  such  persons  as  should 
be  commissioned  by  her  majesty  to  reform  and  order 
ecclesiastical  matters.  This  gave  rise  to  the  Court  of 
Hicrh  Commission,  by  which  afterAvards  so  many  acts  of 
cruelty  a:id  despotism  were  perpetrated,  both  in  England 
and  in  Scotland ;  especially  in  the  latter  country,  when 
Prelacy  was  forced  upon  it  by  the  treacherous  tyranny  of 
King  James. 

Some  of  the  reformed  divines  were  next  appomted  to 
revise  King  Edward's  Liturgy,  and  to  see  whether  any 
such  changes  could  be  made  in  it  as  would  tend  to  render 
it  more  likely  to  include  some  whose  opinions  were  yet 
short  of  a  thorough  reformation.  In  particular,  it  was  pro- 
posed to  have  the  language  of  the  communion  service  so 
modified  that  it  might'  not  necessarily  exclude  the  belief 
of  the  corporeal  presence.  After  several  alterations,  all 
leaning  rather  to  Popery  than  to  Protestantism,  had  been 
made,°the  revised  Book  of  Common  Prayer  was  ratified  by 
act  of  Parliament,  and  uniformity  in  worship  according  to 
it  enjoined.  The  Popish  bishops  refused  to  take  the  oath 
of  supremacy,  and  were,  in  consequence,  deprived  of  their 
offices  and  powers.  This  enabled  the  queen  to  supply  their 
places  with  men  better  affected  to  reformation,  which  was 
accordingly  done,  though  not  without  difficulty,  the  very 
best  men^being  reluctant  to  undertake  situations  of  such 
responsibility,  and  many  being  decidedly  opposed  to  the 
ceremonies,  rites,  and  vestments  which  were  required,  and 
which  they  regarded  as  remnants  of  superstition,  and  in- 
consistent with  Christian  simplicity. 

did  not  pretend  to  any  authority  for  the  ministering  of  divine  service  in 
the  Church,  and  that  all  that  she  claimed  was  that  which  had  at  all 
limes  belonged  to  the  imperial  crown  of  England ; — that  she  had  the  sov- 
ereignty and  rule  over  all  manner  of  persons,  under  God,  so  that  no 
foreign  power  had  rule  over  them.  If  the  oath  of  supremacy  had  implied 
no  more  than  the  plain  meaning  of  these  words,  it  would  scarcely  have 
been  disputed  by  any  ;  but  it  would  have  been  ineffectual  for  the  purpose 
for  which  it  was  intended,  and  it  would  not  have  sanctioned  much  tha» 
was  done  under  its  authority. 


WESTMINSTEH    ASSKMBLY.  29 

The  reforming  divines  soon  became  aware  that  in  these 
points  they  had  to  encounter  her  majesty's  opposition. 
The  queen  was  naturally  vain,  and  therefore  fond  of  pomp 
and  magnihcence  in  everything  ;  nor  did  her  reverence 
for  religion  teach  her  to  abstain  from  presuming  to  seek 
the  gratification  of  her  personal  tastes  and  prejudices  in 
matters  too  sacred  for  mortal  creature  to  tamper  with.  Il 
was  with  great  difficulty  that  they  prevailed  with  her  to 
insert  in  her  injunctions  a  command  for  the  removal  of 
all  images  out  of  churches  ;  but  iliey  could  not  induce  her 
lo  abandon  the  use  of  a  crucifix  in  her  own  chapel. 

The  controversy  concerning  vestments,  and  rites,  and 
ceremonies,  continued,  with  increased  asperity,  on  both 
sides.  All  the  Court  divines,  as  they  may  be  termed, 
headed  by  Archbishop  Parker,  supported  the  queen's  de- 
sire for  retaining  as  much  show  and  pomp  in  religious 
matters  as  might  be  possible  ;  while  Jewell,  Grindal,  Samp- 
son, Fox  the  martyrologist,  and  all  the  most  distinguished 
for  piety  and  liberal-mindedness,  did  their  utmost  to  pro- 
cure a  more  complete  reformation  ;  and  for  this  purpose 
maintained  a  close  correspondence  with  the  most  eminent 
of  the  continental  reformers.*  Jewell,  in  particular,  exerted 
himself  to  the  utmost  against  these  vain  frivolities. 
"  Some,"  said  he,  "  were  so  much  set  on  the  matter  of  the 
habits,  as  if  the  Christian  religion  consisted  in  garments  ; 
but  we,"  added  he,  "  are  not  called  to  the  consultations 
concerning  that  scenical  apparel ;  he  could  set  no  value  on 
these  fopperies.  Some  were  crying  up  a  golden  mediocrity  ; 
he  was  afraid  it  would  prove  a  leaden  one."t  In  short,  it 
is  not  too  much  to  say,  that  all  the  best,  wisest,  and  most 
pious  and  learned  divines  of  the  Church  of  England — all 
the  true  reformers — longed  and  strove  for  a  more  com- 
plete reformation,  lamented  that  it  continued  but  a  half- 
reformed  Church,  and  were  the  real  forefathers  of  the 
Puritans.}: 

*  The  leading  men  of  the  first  race  of  Puritans  were,  Bishops  Jewell, 
Grindal,  Horn,  Sandys,  Pilkington,  Parkhurst,  and  Guest ;  also,  Miles 
Coverdale.  Fox,  Dr.  Humphreys,  Mr.  Sampson,  and  many  others  ol 
scarcely  inferior  reputation.  Even  Parker  at  first  opposed  the  episcopal 
vestments,  and  was  consecrated  without  them. 

t  Burnet's  Hist.  Ref.,  vol.  iii.  p.  424. 

i  In  proof  of  this,  see  I  ife  of  Knox,  Note  R. 
3* 


30  HISTORY    OF    THE 

In  the  beginning  of  the  year  1562,  a  meeting  of  the  Con* 
vocation  was  held,  in  which  the  subject  of  further  reform- 
ation was  vigorously  discussed  on  both  sides.  Some  altera- 
tions were  made  in  the  articles  of  religion,  originallj^  drawn 
up  in  King  Edward's  reign.  These  were  at  first  4-2  in  num- 
ber ;  but  by  omitting  some  and  combining  others,  they 
were  reduced  to  the  39,  which  have  ever  since  formed  the 
standard  of  faith  in  the  Church  of  England.  It  cannot  be 
said  that  they  were  in  all  respects  improved  by  these  alter- 
ations, as  any  one  may  see  by  comparing  them.  But  when 
it  was  proposed  that  there  should  be  some  alterations  in 
the  Prayer-book,  a  very  warm  debate  ensued.  Six  altera- 
tions were  proposed,  to  the  following  purport : — The  abro- 
gation of  all  holidays,  except  Sabbaths,  and  those  relating 
to  Christ, — that  in  prayer  the  minister  should  turn  his  face 
to  the  people,  so  that  they  might  hear  and  be  edified, — 
that  the  ceremony  cf  the  cross  in  baptism  might  be  omitted 
■ — that  the  sick  and  aged  might  not  be  compelled  to  kneel 
at  the  communi.on— that  the  partial  use  of  the  surplice 
might  be  sufficient,  and  that  the  use  of  organs  be  laid  aside.* 
The  main  argument  used  against  these  proposed  improve- 
ments was,  that  they  were  contrary  to  the  Book  of  Com- 
mon Prayer,  which  was  ratified  by  act  of  Parliament,  so 
that  no  alteration  of  anything  contained  in  that  book  could 
be  permitted.  When  the  vote  came  to  be  taken  on  these 
propositions,  forty-three  voted  for  them,  and  thirty-five 
against;  but  when  the  proxies  were  counted,  the  balance 
was  turned  ;  the  final  state  of  the  vote  being  fifty-eight  for, 
and  fifty-nine  against.  Thus  it  was  determined,  by  the 
majority  of  a  single  vote,  and  that  the  proxy  of  an  absent 
person  who  did  not  hear  the  reasoning,  that  the  Prayer- 
Book  should  remain  unimproved,  that  there  should  be  no 
further  reformation,  that  there  should  be  no  relief  granted 
to  those  whose  consciences  felt  aggrieved  by  the  admixture 
of  human  inventions  in  the  worship  of  God,  so  that  the 
"hurch  of  England  was  thenceforth  to  remain,  like  one  of 
\er  own  grand  cathedrals,  a  stately  mass  of  petrified  reli- 
aon. 

A  Book  of  Discipline  was  also  prepared  by  the  same 
Convocation.      Whether  it  was    the   reformation    of  the 

*  Burnet,  vol.  iii.  p.  443. 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBLY.  31 

ecclesiastical  laws  proposed  formerly  by  Cranmer,  does 
not  appear  ;  but  it  did  not  receive  the  approbation  of  the 
House  of  Lords,  and  sunk  into  complete  oblivion.  Per- 
haps the  reason  why  it  received  so  little  countenance  in 
hicrh  quarters,  is  explained  in  a  letter  from  Cox,  now  bishop 
of  Ely,  to  Gualter  of  Zurich: — '■'■  When  I  consider  the  sins 
that  do  everywhere  abound,  and  the  neglect  and  contempt 
of  the  Word  of  God,  I  am  struck  with  horror,  and  tremble 
to  think  what  God  will  do  with  us.  We  have  some  disci- 
pline among  us  with  relation  to  men's  lives,  such  as  it  is ; 
bat  if  any  man  v.^ould  go  about  to  persuade  our  nobility  to 
submit  their  necks  to  that  yoke,  he  may  as  well  venture  to 
pull  the  hair  out  of  a  lion's  beard."*  Several  other  points 
tending  towards  reformation  were  also  proposed,  but  in 
vain  ;  nothing  more  could  be  accomplished  ;  so  that  it  may 
be  fairly  said,  that  with  the  Convocation  of  1562  ended  the 
reformation  of  the  Church  of  England,  before  much  more 
than  half  its  work  had  been  done.  And  it  will  be  admitted 
by  all  who  are  sufficiently  acquainted  with  the  condition  of 
the  people  throughout  the  country  districts  of  the  kingdom, 
that  the  reformation  of  the  English  nation  is  yet  to  begin. 

From  the  time  of  the  Convocation  in  1562,  the  disagree- 
ment between  the  court  divines  and  those  who  wished  for 
further  reformation,  became  gradually  more  and  more 
decided.  It  may  be  expedient  briefly  to  examine  the  views 
entertained  by  these  two  great  opposing  parties.  The  main 
question  on  which  they  were  divided  may  be  thus  stated, 
Whether  it  were  lawful  and  expedient  to  retain  in  the  exter- 
nal aspect  of  religion  a  close  resemblance  to  Avhat  had  pre- 
vailed in  the  times  of  Popery,  or  not  1  The  court  divines 
argued,  that  this  process  would  lead  the  people  more  easily 
to  the  reception  of  the  real  doctrinal  changes,  when  they 
saw  outward  appearances  so  little  altered,  so  that  this 
method  seemed  to  be  recommended  by  expediency.  The 
reformers  replied,  that  this  tended  to  perpetuate  in  the 
people  their  inclination  to  their  former  superstitions,  led 
them  to  think  there  was,  after  all,  little  difierence  between 
the  reformed  and  the  papal  Churches,  and  consequently, 
that  if  it  made  them  quit  Popery  the  more  readily  at  pre- 
sent, it  would  leave  them  at  least  equally  ready  to  return  to 

•  Burnet's  Hist.  Ref.,  vol.  iii.  p.  464. 


32  HISTORY    OF    THE 

it  should  an  opportunity  offer ;  and  for  this  reason  they 
thought  it  best  to  leave  as  few  traces  of  Popery  remaining 
as  possible.  It  was  urged  by  the  Court  party,  that  every 
sovereign  had  authority  to  correct  all  abuses  of  doctrine 
and  worship  within  his  own  dominions  ;  this,  they  asserted, 
was  the  true  meaning  of  the  Act  of  Supremacy,  and  conse- 
quently the  source  of  the  reformation  in  England.  The  true 
reformers  admitted  the  Act  of  Supremacy,  in  the  sense  of 
the  queen^s  explanation  given  in  the  injunctions  ',  but  could 
not  admit  that  the  conscience  and  the  religion  of  the  whole 
nation  was  subject  to  the  arbitrary  disposal  of  the  sove- 
reign. The  Court  party  recognized  the  Church  of  Rome 
as  a  true  Church,  though  corrupt  in  some  points  of  doc- 
trine and  government;  and  this  view  it  was  thouo-ht  neces- 
sary to  maintain,  for  without  this  the  English  bishops  could 
not  trace  their  succession  from  the  apostles.  But  the  de- 
cided reformers  affirmed  the  pope  to  be  antichrist,  and  the 
Church  of  Rome  to  be  no  true  Church  ;  nor  would  they 
risk  the  validity  of  their  ordinations  on  the  idea  of  a  suc- 
cession through  such  a  channel.  Neither  party  denied 
that  the  Bible  was  a  perfect  rule  of  faith  ;  but  the  Court 
party  did  not  admit  it  to  be  a  standard  of  Church  govern- 
ment and  discipline,  asserting  that  it  had  been  left  to  the 
judgment  of  the  civil  magistrate  in  Christian  countries,  to 
accommodate  the  government  of  the  Church  to  the  policy 
of  the  State.  The  reformers  maintained  the  Scriptures  to 
be  the  standard  of  Church  government  and  discipline,  as 
well  as  doctrine ;  to  the  extent,  at  the  very  least,  that 
nothing  should  be  imposed  as  necessary  which  was  not 
expressly  contained  in,  or  derived  from  them  by  necessary 
consequence  ;  adding,  that  if  any  discretionary  power  in 
minor  matters  were  necessary,  it  must  be  vested,  not  in 
the  civil  magistrate,  but  in  the  spiritual  office-bearers  of 
the  Church  itself.  The  Court  reformers  held  that  the 
practice  of  the  primitive  Church  for  the  four  or  five  earliest 
centuries  was  a  proper  standard  of  Church  governnient  and 
discipline,  even  better  suited  to  the  dignity  of  a  national 
establishment  than  the  times  of  the  apostles  j  and  that, 
therefore,  nothing  more  was  needed  than  merely  to  remove 
the  more  modern  innovations  of  Popery.  The  true  reform 
ers  wished  to  keep  close  to  the  Scripture  m  dei,  and  to 
admit  neither  office-bearers,,  ceremonies,  nov  r  i-dinan^*^^. 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBLY.  33 

but  such  as  were  therein  appointed  or  sanctioned.  The 
Court  party  affirmed,  that  things  in  their  own  nature  indif- 
ferent, such  as  rites,  cerenrionies,  and  vestments,  might  he 
appointed  and  made  necessary  by  the  command  of  the  civil 
magistrates ;  and  that  then  it  was  the  bounden  duty  of  all 
subjects  to  obey.  But  the  reformers  maintained,  that  what 
Christ  had  left  indifferent,  no  human  laws  ought  to  make 
necessary  ;  and  besides,  that  such  rites  and  ceremonies  as 
had  been  abused  *,o  idolatry,  and  tended  to  lead  men  back 
to  Popery  and  superstition,  were  no  longer  indifferent,  but 
were  to  be  rejected  as  unlawful.  Finally,  the  Court  party 
held  that  there  must  be  a  standard  of  uniformity,  which 
standard  was  the  queen's  supremacy,  and  the  laws  of  the 
land.  The  reformers  regarded  the  Bible  as  the  only  stan- 
dard, but  thought  compliance  was  due  to  the  decrees  of 
provincial  and  national  synods,  which  might  be  approved 
and  enforced  by  civil  authority.  In  this  point,  the  view 
entertained  by  the  reformers  might  have  been  carried  to 
the  extent  of  oppression;  but  it  never  could  have  been  so 
direct  and  immediate,  and  was  subject  to  so  many  checks, 
that  it  amounted  to  little  more  than  a  remote  possibility. 
At  the  same  time,  it  is  perfectly  evident  that  the  true  prin- 
ciples of  religious  liberty  and  toleration  were  not  under- 
stood by  either  party  ;  and  it  may  be  fairly  questioned, 
whether,  even  in  the  present  day,  these  principles  are 
rightly  understood. 

Such  is  a  brief  outline  of  the  direct  cause  of  the  conflict 
between  the  Court  party  of  the  English  reformers,  and  their 
brethren  who  desired  a  more  complete  reformation,  and  of 
the  leading  arguments  used  on  both  sides.  It  cannot  fail 
to  strike  every  attentive  reader,  that  precisely  the  same 
conflict  is  again  renewed,  both  in  England  and  Scotland, 
and  in  all  its  leading  principles.  So  close  indeed  is  the 
resemblance,  that  it  is  difficult  to  peruse  the  writings  of 
those  times  without  insensibly  beginning  to  think  we  are 
reading  some  of  the  controversial  works  of  the  present 
day.  And,  perhaps,  in  order  to  arrive  at  a  full  under- 
standing of  the  real  nature  and  bearing  of  the  present  con- 
troversies, no  better  plan  could  be  devised  than  to  prose- 
cute a  careful  study  of  the  writings  of  the  Court  divines, 
and  the  Puritans  of  the  Elizabethan  age. 

But  to  resume.     It  seems  to  have  been  expected  by  the 


34f  HISTORY    OF    TH!-: 

Court  party  that  the  proceedings  of  the  Convocation  and 
the  acts  of  Parliament,  injunctions,  and  proclamations, 
would  speedily  produce  an  entire  conformity.  In  this  ex- 
pectation they  were  disappointed.  The  regular  parochial 
clergy,  both  in  town  and  country,  not  only  disliked  the 
vestments  themselves,  but  perceived  that,  in  general,  the 
people  bore  towards  these  relics  of  a  persecuting  and  op- 
pressive system  at  least  an  equal  aversion.  Some,  indeed, 
wore  them  occasionally,  in  obedience  to  the  law,  but  more 
frequently  officiated  with  them  ;  and  although  the  bishops, 
most  of  whom,  though  at  first  opposed,  had  become  recon- 
ciled to  the  "scenic  apparel,"  cited  them  into  their 
courts,  and  admonished  them,  yet  this  had  little  effect,  as 
they  had  not  yet  proceeded  to  suspension  and  deprivation. 
At  length  information  of  these  irregularities  was  given  to 
the  queen.  Her  majesty  was  highly  displeased,  especially 
on  the  ground  that  so  little  regard  was  paid  to  her  laws, 
and  gave  strict  command  to  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury, 
"  to  take  effectual  methods  that  an  exact  order  and  uni- 
formity be  maintained  in  all  external  rites  and  ceremonies, 
as  by  law  and  good  usages  are  provided  for."* 

This  severe  and  peremptory  command  immediately 
roused  the  bishops  to  activitj^,  and  in  particular,  stimulat- 
ed Archbishop  Parker  to  such  a  degree  of  fierce  and  un- 
relenting sternness,  as  seemed  completely  contrary  to  all 
his  former  life  and  character.  He  did  his  utmost  to  urge 
forward  Grindal,  bishop  of  London,  to  compel  the  minis- 
ters within  his  diocese  to  conform,  though  he  well  knew 
that  the  opinions  of  that  pious  prelate  were  not  only  averse 
from  everything  like  oppression,  but  were  opposed  in  par- 
ticular to  the  sacerdotal  vestments.  Parker  framed  some 
articles  to  enforce  the  habits,  and  requested  the  queen  to 
give  them  the  authority  of  her  sanction.  But  the  pride  of 
Elizabeth  could  not  endure  that  a  subject  should  frame 
articles  to  enforce  her  decrees,  and  instead  of  ratifying 
them,  she  issued  a  proclamation,  requiring  immediate  uni- 
formity in  the  habits,  on  pain  of  prohibition  from  preach- 
ing, and  deprivation  from  office. 

And  now  the  storm  burst  forth  in  earnest.  The  whole 
nainisters  of  London  were  summoned  to  Lambeth,  and  the 


?  Strype's  Life  of  Parker,  p.  155. 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBLY.  35 

question  put  to  them,  Whether  they  would  conform  to  the 
apparel  estahlished  by  law,  and  subscribe  their  submission 
on  the  spot  1  Those  who  should  refuse,  were  to  be  sus- 
pended immediately,  and  after  three  months,  deprived  of 
their  livings.  Threats,  persuasions,  and  the  dread  of  pov- 
erty, induced  sixty-one  out  of  one  hundred  to  subscribe  ; 
tliirty-seven  absolutely  refused,  and  were  immediately  sus- 
pended,— and  those  thirty-seven,  as  their  oppressor  ad- 
mitted, were  the  best  and  ablest  preachers  in  the  city.* 
Many  churches  were  at  once  shut  up,  the  ruling  party  dis- 
regarding the  loss  of  religious  privileges  to  the  congrega- 
tions, in  their  zeal  to  enforce  conformity  in  matters  which 
they  themselves  admitted  to  be  in  their  own  nature  indif- 
ferent. After  a  short  interval,  many  of  the  most  pious 
and  able  men  were  ejected  from  the  churches,  and  cast 
upon  the  world  in  a  state  of  utter  destitution,  even  forbid 
to  preach  to  others  that  Gospel  which  had  been  to  their 
own  souls  glad  tidings  of  great  joy.  Surely  it  had  been  a 
strange  and  portentous  thing  to  see  such  men  as  Miles 
Coverdale,  the  translator  of  the  Bible,  in  his  feeble  but 
most  venerable  age,  and  Fox  the  martyrologist,  whose 
writings  had  done  so  much  for  the  overthrow  of  Popery, 
and  the  support  of  the  reformed  faith,  driven  from  their 
homes  and  weeping  flocks,  and  exposed  to  reproach  and 
poverty,  because  they  would  not  consent  to  disfigure  their 
persons  with  the  gaudy  vestments  characteristic  of  Romish 
superstition.  In  vain  did  the  oppressed  Puritans — for  we 
may  now  fairly  use  that  distinctive  appellation — apply  to 
the  Earl  of  Leicester,  the  Earl  of  Bedford,  and  such  other 
noblemen  as  Avere  known  to  be  favorable  to  them,  im- 
ploring these  distinguished  m.en  to  do  their  utmost  to  pro- 
cure some  mitigation  of  such  oppressive  *  measures.  No 
mitigation  could  be  obtained.  To  conform  or  to  suffer 
were  the  only  alternatives,  and  they  nobly  chose  the  lat- 
ter, rather  than  violate  conscience. 

These  severe  measures  adopted  by  the  Court  party,  and 
prosecuted  with  such  unrelenting  rigor  against  their  better 
brethren,  attracted  the  attention  of  the  reformed  churches 
in  other  countries.  The  continental  divines  wrote  frequent- 
ly to  England    on  the  subject,  but  without  effect.     The 

•  Strype's  Life  of  Parker,  p.  215. 


36  HISTORY    OF    THE 

Church  of  Scotland,  which  had  been  reformed  and  re-or- 
ganized on  a  truly  scriptural  model  by  the  blessing  of  God 
on  the  strenuous  exertions  of  John  Knox,  also  addressed 
an  earnest  and  affectionate  remonstrance  to  the  English 
prelates,  imploring  them  to  treat  their  faithful  and  suffering 
brethren  with  greater  tenderness,  disapproving,  at  the  same 
time,  of  their  preposterous  attachment  to  the  superstitious 
trappings  of  Rome.*  But  all  was  in  vain:  brotherly  kind- 
ness and  Cbristian  charity  must  equally  be  sacrificed  to 
gratify  the  queen's  taste  for  idle  pageantry,  ard  to  cover 
the  mean  and  self-condemned  compliance  of  her  courtly 
prelates.  The  ejected  Puritan  ministers  found  extreme 
difficulty  in  obtaining  opportunities  for  preaching;  and 
some  remained  entirely  silent.  Many  pamphlets  were, 
however,  written  by  them,  which  tended  to  keep  alive  and 
spread  their  opinions,  and  which  were  eagerly  read  by  the 
people.  This  drew  from  the  Star  Chamber  a  degree,  strict- 
ly prohibiting  the  publication  of  all  such  writings,  under 
heavy  penalties. 

[1566.]  Thus,  commanded  to  conform  even  against  the 
dictates  of  conscience,  ejected  from  their  churches  and 
forbidden  to  preach  anywhere  else,  and  deprived  of  the 
liberty  of  the  press,  the  Puritans  were  driven  to  that  ex- 
treme point  where  endurance  ceases  and  active  resistance 
begins.  Accordingly  they  met,  and  gravely  and  solemnly 
deliberated.  Whether  it  were  not  now  both  lawful  and  ne- 
cessary to  separate  from  the  Established  Church.  After 
much  earnest  consultation,  they  came  to  this  solemn  and 
important  conclusion.  That  since  they  could  not  have  the 
Word  of  God  preached,  nor  the  sacraments  administered, 
without  "  idolatrous  gear,"  as  they  termed  the  vestments 
and  ceremonies,  and  since  there  had  been  a  separate  con- 
gregation in  London,  and  another  in  Geneva,  in  Queen 
Mary's  time,  in  which  there  was  a  book  and  order  of 
preaching,  administration  of  sacraments  and  discipline, 
free  from  the  superstitions  of  the  English  service,  it  was 
their  duty,  in  the  present  circumstances,  to  separate  from 
the  public  churches,  and  to  assemble,  as  they  had  oppor- 
tunity, in  private  houses  or  elsewhere,  to  worship  God  in 
a  manner  that  might  not  offend  against  the  light  of  tlieir 

•  M*Crie'sLifeofKn(>x,  p.  295, 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBLY.  37 

This  most  important  event  took  place  in 
the  summer  of  the  jear  15(36,  and  from  that  time  onward 
the  Puritan  party  may  be  regarded  as  forming  a  body  dis- 
tinct from  the  Church  of  England,  although  they  were  the 
true  successors  of  the  first  and  greatest  reforming  fathers 
of  that  Church. 

It  would  be  a  great  mistake  to  suppose,  that  the  only 
subject  in  dispute  between  the  Puritans  and  their  antago- 
nists was  that  respecting  clerical  vestments.  That  formed, 
indeed,  a  very  prominent  point  in  the  controversy,  because 
it  was  so  apparent,  and  so  easily  brought  under  the  terms 
of  a  royal  proclamation.  But  there  were  many,  and  these 
still  more  important  matters  which  they  wished  to  have 
reformed.  Of  these,  the  most  prominent  were  the  follow- 
ing. They  regarded  the  assumed  superiority  of  bishops 
over  presbyters  as  a  higher  order,  and  the  claim  on  their 
part,  of  the  sole  right  of  ordination,  discipline  and  gov- 
ernment, as  unscriptural  in  itself,  and  tending  both  to 
secularize  them,  and  to  produce  an  intolerable  despotism. 
Along  with  this,  they  complained  of  the  whole  array  of 
cathedral  office-bearers  as  of  the  same  character,  and 
equally  unwarranted.  They  lamented  the  want  of  disci- 
pline, in  consequence  of  which,  it  was  impossible  to  main- 
tain the  purity  of  the  most  sacred  ordinances.  Regarding 
set  forms  of  prayer  as  properly  intended  to  meet  the  ne- 
cessities of  a  time  of  ignorance,  they  did  not  dispute  their 
lawfulness,  while  they  wished  a  greater  liberty  in  prayer, 
where  such  help  was  not  required ;  and  they  disapproved 
also  of  too  many  repetitions,  of  responses,  and  of  several 
exceptionable  expressions,  particularly  in  the  marriage 
and  funeral  services.  They  disapproved  of  the  reading  of 
the  Apocryphal  books  in  the  church ;  and  while  they  re- 
garded the  homilies  as  in  themselves  valuable,  they  held 
that  no  man  should  be  ordamed  to  the  ministry,  who  was 
not  himself  able  to  preach  and  to  expound  the  Scriptures. 
While  they  complained  of  pluralities,  non-residence,  and 
an  unpreaching  clergy,  they  viewed  these  as  caused  chiefly 
by  patronage  exercised  by  the  queen,  bishops,  and  lay-pa- 
trons, and  held  that  it  ought  to  be  abolished,  and  ministers 
to  be  appointed  by  the  election  of  the  people.     They  cou- 

*  Strjne^s  Lif^  of  Parker,  p  241. 
4 


38  HISTORY    OF    THE 

demned,  on  the  one  hand,  the  keeping  of  the  church-festi- 
vals and  saints'  days  ;  and  on  the  other,  the  open  and  fla- 
grant violation  of  the  Lord's  day,  as  equally  contrary  to 
Scripture.  Cathedral  worship,  chanted  prayers,  and  instru- 
mental music,  they  also  condemned,  as  tending  rather  to 
amuse  than  edify.  And  they  declared  their  great  reluc- 
tance to  comply  with  certain  rites  and  ceremonies  which 
w^ere  strictly  enjoined,  and  which  they  regarded  as  super- 
stitious or  unmeaning,  such  as — the  sign  of  the  cross  in 
baptism,  baptism  by  midwives,  the  exclusion  of  parents 
and  the  employment  of  godfathers  and  godmothers,  the 
rite  of  confirmation,  kneeling  at  the  communion,  as  im- 
plying transubstantiation,  bowing  at  the  name  of  Jesus, 
the  ring  in  marriage,  and  certain  foolish  words  used  in  the 
ceremony,  and  the  wearing  of  the  surplice  and  other  cere- 
monies used  in  divine  service. 

When  so  many,  and  such  important  topics  were  all 
equally  in  dispute,  and  not  the  slightest  redress  could  be 
obtained,  but  conformity  in  every  particular  was  enforced 
with  the  most  oppressive  and  unrelaxing  rigor,  it  was  not 
strange  that  the  persecuted  Puritans  should  determine  to 
separate  themselves  from  a  Church  which  they  regarded 
as  but  half  reformed,  and  which  sternly  refused  to  advance 
to  a  more  pure  and  perfect  reformation,  according,  not  to 
the  will  of  princes,  but  to  the  word  of  God.  And  the  time 
may  come,  when  the  Church  of  England  Avill  bitterly  be- 
wail the  insane  conduct  of  those,  who,  in  that  reforming 
period,  took  up  and  pursued  a  course  which  crushed  the 
life-spring  out  of  its  heart,  and  swathed  up  the  cold  and 
paralyzed  remains,  to  lie  in  state,  a  decent  but  a  dead  for- 
mality. 

[1567.]  The  chief  leaders  of  the  separation,  according 
to  Fuller,  were  the  Rev.  Messrs.  Colman,  Button,  Haling- 
ham,  Benson,  White,  Rowland,  and  Hawkins,  all  of  whom 
held  benefices  within  the  diocese  of  London.  No  sooner 
Avas  the  queen  informed  that  the  Puritans  had  begun  to 
form  separate  assemblies  for  worship,  than  she  commanded 
her  commissioners  to  take  effectual  measures  to  keep  the 
laity  to  their  parish  churches  ;  and  to  let  them  know  that 
if  they  frequented  conventicles,  or  broke  the  ecclesiastical 
laws,  they  should,  for  the  first  offence,  be  deprived  of  the 
freedom  of  the  city,  and   then  abide  what  further  punish- 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBLY.  39 

inent  she  would  direct.  But  the  requirements  of  con- 
science are  stronger  than  a  sovereign's  threats.  They 
continued  to  hokl  their  private  meetings;  and  on  the  19th 
ot  June,  15G7,  they  agreed  to  have  a  sermon  preached  and 
the  communion  dispensed  at  Phmiber's  Hall,  which  they 
engaged  for  that  day.*  The  day  came,  and  they  assembled 
to  worship  the  God  of  peace,  but  their  peaceful  worship 
was  rudely  interrupted  by  the  entrance  of  the  armed 
officers  of  the  civil  power,  who  seized  upon  the  chief, 
dispersed  the  rest,  and  dragged  their  victims  to  prison. 
Next  day  they  were  brought  before  the  bishop  of  London, 
and  the  chief  magistrate  of  the  city,  charged  with  the 
heinous  offence  of  forsaking  the  Church  which  persecuted 
them,  and  setting  up  separate  assemblies  for  worship. 
They  defended  their  conduct  ably  ;  but  because  they  would 
not  yield,  they  were,  to  the  number  of  twenty-four  men 
and  seven  women,  sent  to  Bridewell,  where  they  endured 
the  hardships  of  more  than  a  year's  imprisonment. 
.  [1571.]  A  parliament  was  held  in  l.o71,  in  which  there 
were  some  attempts  made  to  procure  a  further  reformation. 
One  member,  Mr.  Strickland,  proposed  to  bring  in  a  bill 
for  that  purpose,  asserting  that  the  Prayer  Book,^vith  some 
superstitious  remains  of  Popery  in  the  Church,  might  be 
altered  without  any  danger  to  religion.  Her  majesty  was 
so  displeased,  that  she  sent  for  him  to  the  council,  reproved 
him  sharply,  and  forbade  his  attendance  in  Parliament  ;  but 
this  caused  such  an  alarm  in  the  House  of  Commons,  as  a 
dangerous  invasion  of  their  privileges,  that  she  found  it 
convenient  to  remove  her  prohibition.  An  act  was  passed, 
ratifying  the  Thirty-nine  Articles,  which  had  been  framed 
by  the  Convocation  of  1562;  and  one  clause  in  that  act 
admitted  the  validity  of  ordination  by  presbyters  alone, 
without  a  bishop.f  This  clause  was  greatly  disliked  by 
the  bishops,  and  has  been  repeatedly  condemned  by  their 

•  Strype'sLife  of  Grinda],pp.  115,  and  135,  136. 

j  In  none  of  the  MS.  copies  of  the  Thirty-nine  Articles,  either  as  pass- 
ed by  the  Convocation  of  1562,  or  as  ratified  bv  the  Parliament  of  1571, 
IS  the  clause  in  the  20th  article  to  be  found,  by  which  the  Church  of 
England  claims  the  power  "  to  decree  rites  and  ceremonies."  It  must 
have  been  surreptitiously  introduced  afterwards  by  some  of  the  Prelatic 
party,  without  civil  or  ecclesiastical  authority.— See  Historical  and  Cru 
tical  Essay  on  the  Thirty-nine  Articles^  pp.  277-279. 


40  HISTORY    OF    THE 

successors,  bnt  remains  still  unrepealed.  The  House  of 
Commons  were  desirous  also  that  articles  of  discipline 
should  be  framed  and  enacted  ;  but  ^vhen  this  was  discoun- 
tenanced by  the  bishops,  they  presented  an  address  to  the 
queen,  representing  the  grievous  injuries  sustained  by  the 
Church  and  kingdom  for  want  of  true  and  efficient  disci- 
pline, supplicating  her  majesty  that  proper  laws  might  be 
provided  and  enacted  for  t'he  reformation  of  these  abuses. 
Butt  the  queen  dissolved  the  Parliament  without  answering 
this  supplication. 

Although  little  was  done  in  the  Parliament  to  relieve  the 
oppressed  Puritans,  some  steps  were  taken  by  the  Convo- 
cation which  tended  to  increase  their  oppression  A  canon 
of  discipline  was  framed,  empowering  the  bishops  to  call 
in  all  their  licences  for  preaching,  and  to  issue  new  licen- 
ces to  those  only  whose  qualifications  gained  their  appro- 
bation;  and  among  the  qualifications  specified,  subscrip- 
tion to  all  the  points  of  which  the  Puritans  complained  was 
particularly  mentioned.  These  canons  were  not  sanctioned 
by  royal  authority ;  but  the  bishops,  knowing  well  the 
queen's  inclinations,  did  not  hesitate  "to  enforce  them  with 
great  rigor.  Numbers  of  the  Puritan  divines  were  imme- 
diately deprived  of  their  licences  to  preach,  because  they 
refused  to  subscribe  canons  not  yet  legalized;  and  it  be- 
came apparent  that  a  formidable  crisis  was  at  hand. 

At  the  very  time  that  the  bishops  were  thus  silencmg 
the  persons  whom  they  themselves  admitted  to  be  the  best 
preachers  in  the  kingdom,  the  state  of  religion  throughout 
the  country  was  truly  deplorable.  Of  this  Strype,  no  Pu- 
ritan,  presents  the  following  outline  : — "  The  Churchmen 
heaped  up  many  benefices  upon  themselves,  and  resided 
upon  none,  neglecting  their  cures  ;  many  of  them  alienated 
their  lands,  made  unreasonable  leases,  and  wastes  of  their 
woods  ;  granted  reversions  and  advowsons  to  their  wives 
and  children,  or  to  others  for  their  use.  Churches  ran 
greatly  into  dilapidations  and  decays  ;  and  were  kept  nasty 
and  filthy,  and  indecent  for  God's  worship.  Among  the 
laity  there  was  little  devotion.  The  Lord's  day  greatly 
profaned,  and  little  observed.  The  common  prayers  not 
frequented.  Some  lived  without  any  service  of  God  at  all. 
Many  were  mere  heathens  and  atheists.  The  queen's  own 
court  an  harbor  for  epicures  and  atheists,  and  a  kind  of  laAV 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBLY  41 

less  place,  because  it  stood  in  no  parish.  Which  things 
made  good  men  fear  some  sad  judgments  impending  over 
the  nation."* 

Perceiving  that  there  was  no  prospect  whatever  of  any 
further  reformation  in  religious  matters  proceeding  from 
either  the  sovereign  or  the  convocation,  and  lamenting  the 
wretched  ignorance  and  immorality  which  prevailed  in  the 
kingdom,  the  Puritans  now  resolved  to  •.  xert  themselves  to 
the  utmost  of  their  means  and  opportunities  for  their  own 
instruction,  and  that  of  their  perishing  coimtrymen.  And 
as  Dr.  Scambler,  bishop  of  Peterborough,  was  less  intole- 
rant than  many  of  his  order,  the  ministers  within  his  dio- 
cese, particularly  those  of  Northampton,  with  his  approba- 
tion, and  that  of  the  mayor  of  the  town,  formed  an  associa- 
tion for  promoting  the  purity  of  worship  and  the  mainte- 
nance of  discipline.  The  regulations  of  this  association 
were  very  tempeiate,  involving  no  departure  from  any  of 
the  established  modes  of  worship,  nor  any  rigid  disciplinary 
arrangements.  And  as  they  were  aware  of  the  extreme 
inability  to  preach  instructively,  which  characterized  very 
many  of  the  clergy,  they  endeavored  also  to  provide  a 
remedy  for  this  evil.  For  this  purpose  they  instituted  what 
they  termed  "  prophesyings,"  taking  the  designation  from 
1  Cor.  xiv.  31,  "Ye  may  all  prophesy  one  by  one,  that  all 
may  learn,  and  all  maybe  comforted."  In  these  prophesy- 
ings one  presided,  and  a  text  previously  selected  was 
explained  by  one  of  the  ministers  to  whom  it  had  been 
assigned.  After  his  exposition,  each  in  turn  gave  his  view 
of  the  passage  ;  and  the  whole  exercise  was  summed  up  by 
the  president  or  moderator  for  the  day,  who  concluded  by 
exhorting  all  to  persevere  in  the  discharge  of  their  sacred 
duties.f  This  scheme,  it  is  evident,  w^as  admirably  calcu- 
lated to  increase  the  scriptural  knowledge,  and  promote 
the  usefulness  of  the  clergymen  who  engaged  in  it ;  and  it 
deserved  the  cordial  approbation  of  all  who  were  desirous 
to  promote  the  religious  welfare  of  the  community.  But 
it  was  regarded  with  jealousy  by  the  bishops,  and  ere 
long  encountered  the  keen  hostility  of  Elizabeth  herself. 

[1572.]   When  the  Parliament  met  in  1572,  an  attempt 

•Strype's  Life  of  Parker,  p.  395., 

t  Slrype's  Life  of  Grinda],  pp.  175,  176. 

4* 


42  HISTORY    OF    THE 

was  made  by  the  House  of  Commons  to  mitigate  the  suf- 
ferings of  the  Prritans,  and  they  passed  two  bills  for  that 
purpose  This  gave  such  offence  to  the  queen,  that  she 
sharply  reproved  them  for  interfering  in  such  matters,  and 
commanded  them  to  deliver  up  the  bills.  One  of  the  mem- 
bers boldly  complained  of  this  conduct,  as  trenching  upon 
the  liberty  of  Parliament,  and  for  his  boldness  was  sent  to 
the  Tower.  The  Puritans,  who  had  reason  to  expect  some 
countenance  from  the  Parliament,  prepared  a  full  statement 
of  their  grievances  and  their  desires,  in  a  treatise  entitled 
"An  Admonition  to  the  Parliament."  But  while  the  Par- 
liament was  not  permitted  to  grant  any  redress,  the  authors 
of  the  Admonition  were  cast  into  prison,  and  treated  with 
great  severity.  Whitgift  was  appointed  to  answer  the 
Admonition,  and  Cartwright  answered  Whitgift,  which  led 
to  a  lengthened  controversy  between  these  learned  and 
able  men.  Each,  and  still  more  eagerly  the  partisans  of 
each,  claimed  the  victory  ;  but  the  controversy  did  not 
terminate  with  the  writings  of  these  antagonists,  nor  is  it 
yet  terminated.  It  is  waged  in  the  present  day  with  equal 
keenness,  and  not  inferior  ability ;  it  may  be  added,  with 
no  novelty  in  its  leading  principles,  and  very  little  in  its^ 
arguments.  Cartv/right  maintained  that  the  Scriptures 
were  not  only  the  sole  standard  of  doctrine,  but  also  of 
discipline  and  government,  and  that  the  Church  of  Christ 
in  all  ages  was  to  be  regulated  by  them.  Whitgift  held, 
that  the  Scriptures  were  a  rule  of  faith;  but  not  designed 
to  be  a  standard  of  discipline  and  government — that  this 
was  changeable,  and  might  be  adapted  to  the  civil  govern- 
ment of  any  country — and  that  the  times  of  the  apostles 
could  not  be  the  best  model,  but  rather  the  first  four  cen- 
turies of  the  Church,  during  which  she  had  reached  a  ma- 
ture development.  In  what  do  these  views  essentially 
differ  from  the  advocates  and  opponents  of  Patristic  theo- 
logy in  the  present  day  1  Till  men  agree  in  some  leading 
principles  by  w^hich  any  great  controversy  must  be  ruled, 
it  is  vain  to  expect  that  it  can  ever  be  brought  to  a  satis- 
factory conclusion;  yet  those  who  appeal  to  Scripture 
authority  alone,  must  surely  be  held  to  be  following  the 
most  proper  and  authoritative  method  in  discussions  of 
that  nature. 

All  hope  of  legislative  assistance  in  prosecuting  further 


WRSTMINSTER    ASSEMBLY.  43 

reformation  beinsr  cut  off  by  the  queen's  arbitrary  proce- 
dure, the  Puritans  resolved  to  take  another  step  still  more 
daring  and  decisive  than  any  on  which  they  had  previously 
ventu'i-ed.  Several  of  the  ministers  of  London  and  its 
vicinity  met  tooether  and  determined  to  form  themselves 
into  a  presbyteiy,  to  be  held  at  Wandsworth,  a  village  on 
ihe  banks  of  the  Thames,  about  five  miles  from  the  city. 
On  the  20th  of  November,  1572,  about  fifteen  ministers 
met,  eleven  elders  were  chosen  to  form  members  of  the 
body  ;  their  otlices  were  described  in  a  register,  entitled, 
*'  The  Orders  of  Wandsworth  ;"  and  this  was  the  first  fully 
constituted  Presbyterian  Church  in  England.*  The  intel- 
liirence  of  this  event  soon  reached  the  bishops  ;  the  Court 
of  High  Commission  took  the  alarm  ;  the  queen  issued  a 
procUfmation  for  enforcing  the  Act  of  Uniformity  ;  but  the 
Presbytery  of  Wandsworth  for  a  time  eluded  the  fury  of 
their  enemies,  and  other  presbyteries  were  formed  in 
neighboring  counties. 

There  was  now  little  possibility  of  reconciliation  be- 
tween the  High  Church  and  the  Puritan  parties ;  for  the 
unbending  determination  of  the  former  not  to  grant  the 
slisrhtest  relief  to  the  sufferings  of  their  brethren,  nor  the 
lea^st  accommodation  to  their  aggrieved  consciences,  had 
driven  them  from  mere  non-conformity  into  the  adoption 
of  a  different  form  of  Church  polity,  possessing  in  itself 
the  elements  of  perpetuity  and  growth.  Puritanism  had 
thenceforward  not  only  a  vital  principle,  but  also  system- 
atic ors-anization,  enabling  it  to  live  on,  and  increase  in 
spite  of  any  amount  of  persecution  ;  for  a  system  dies  not 
with  the  individuals  that  held  it,  but  draws  into  itself  the 
fresh  life  of  succeeding  generations. 

Having  thus  traced  the  rise  of  Puritanism,  and  seen  its 
systematic  organization,  it  will  not  be  necessary  to  follow 
its  progress  so  minutely  in  what  remains  of  this  introduc- 
tory outline.  We  shall  content  ourselves  with  touching 
briefly  on  the  main  events  which  mark  the  growing  devel- 
opment of  the  leading  principles  characteristic  of  the  two 
contending:  parties. 

The  sufferings  of  the  Puritans  continued  unabated  dur- 
ing the  remainder  of  the  life  of  Archbishop  Parker  ;  many 
of^'them  being  silenced,  imprisoned,  banished,  and   other. 
•  Neal,  vol.  i.  p.  198;  Collier,  vol.  ii.  p.  541. 


44  HISTORY    OF    THE 

wise  oppressed  by  that  relentless  prelate.  In  vain  did  the 
House  of  Commons,  and  several  influential  noblemen,  re- 
peatedly interpose  in  their  behalf;  they  were  detested  by 
the  queen,  and  Parker  was  ready  to  gratify  her  majesty 
without  scruple,  and  to  any  extent.  In  particular,  he 
strove  to  suppress  the  "prophesyings,"  declaring  that 
they  were  nests  of  Puritanism  ;  and  by  his  complaints  he 
succeeded  in  directing  against  them  the  vengeance  of  the 
despotic  sovereign.  He  did  not,  however,  live  to  direct 
the  storm  v/hich  he  had  raised,  but  died  in  May,  1576,  and 
was  succeeded  by  Grindal. 

Grindal,  aware  of  the  opposition  to  the  exercises  or 
prophesyings  which  had  been  raised  by  his  predecessor, 
attempted  to  regulate  them  so  that  no  offence  might  be 
taken,  or  at  least,  that  they  might  be  the  more  easily  de- 
fended. But  the  queen  had  formed  her  resolution,  from 
which  she  could  not  be  moved  by  the  most  respectful  and 
elaborate  arguments,  and  the  most  urgent  and  humble  en- 
treaties of  the  afflicted  archbishop.  She  "  declared  her- 
self offended  at  the  numbers  of  preachers,  and  also  at  the 
exercises,  and  warned  him  to  redress  both,  urging  that  it 
was  good  for  the  Church  to  have  few  preachers^  and  that 
three  or  four  might  suffice  for  a  county  ;  and  that  the  read- 
ing of  the  homilies  to  the  people  was  enough.  In  short 
she  required  him  to  do  these  two  things, — to  abridge  the 
number  of  preachers,  and  to  put  down  the  religious  exer- 
cises."* This  peremptory  command  both  grieved  and 
alarmed  Grindal,  who  knew  the  excessive  ignorance  which 
prevailed  both  among  the  preachers  and  the  people,  and 
was  anxious  to  promote  whatever  tended  to  the  increase 
of  religious  knowledge  and  purity.  He  wrote  to  her  ma- 
jesty a  long  and  earnest  letter,  entering  fully  into  the  sub- 
ject, pleading  the  importance  of  preaching  as  the  divinely 
appointed  method  of  communicating  religious  instruction 
to  the  people, — showing  how  admirably  these  exercises 
were  fitted  to  improve  the  ministers  who  joined  in  them, 
and  consequently  to  qualify  them  for  the  discharge  of  their 
chief  function;  and  after  imploring  her  not  to  suppress  so 
valuable  an  institution,  and  stating  his  readiness  to  resign 
his  office  if  that  were  her  pleasure,  declared  that  he  could 
not,  without  offence  to  the  majesty  of  God,  send  out  in- 
•  Strype's  Life  of  Grindal,  p.  221. 


^vl:sTMI^sTER  assembly.  45 

junctions  for  suppressing  the  exercises.  To  this  solemn 
appeal  the  queen's  answer  was — an  order  for  the  imprison- 
ment of  Grindal  in  his  house,  and  his  suspension  from 
his  functicns  for  six  months;  and  an  immediate  suppres- 
sion of  the  prophesyings  by  the  authority  of  a  royal  pro- 
clamation. k^ucil  were  ihc  fruits  of  the  Crown's  ecclesias- 
tical supremacy,  when  possessed  by  a  despotic  monarch. 
It  may  be  added,  that  Grindal  had  the  firmness  to  main- 
tain his  integrity  for  eight  years,  during  which  his  suspen- 
sion continued,  and  his  archiepiscopal  functions  were 
generally  performed  by  a  commission  ;  but  at  length  he 
yielded  so  far  as  to  suppress  the  exercises  within  his  own 
jurisdiction,  though  he  would  not  issue  injunctions  to  that 
effect  to  the  bishops.  Unhappily  it  was  not  necessary  ; 
they  were  in  general  but  too  ready  to  obey  the  arbitrary 
commands  of  their  haughty  and  despotic  sovereign. 

[1580.]  A  few  years  afterwards  another  development  of 
regal  and  prelatic  tyranny  appeared,  in  an  act  passed  by  the 
Parliament  of  1580,  prchibiting  the  publication  of  books  or 
pamphlets  assailing  the  opinions  of  the  Prelates,  and  de- 
fending those  of  the  Puritans.  In  the  same  session  of  Par- 
liament another  act  was  passed,  one  portion  of  which  em- 
powered the  infliction  of  heavy  fines  and  imprisonment  upon 
those  who  absented  themselves  from  "  church,  chapel,  or 
other  place  where  common  prayer  is  said,  according  to  the 
Act  of  Uniformity."  The  apparatus  of  persecution  was  now 
nearly  complete  ;  and  the  pernicious  character  of  the 
Crown's  ecclesiastical  supremacy  was  sufficiently  evident 
in  at  least  its  main  aspect,  although  it  subsequently  reache(^ 
a  far  more  terrible  degree  of  persecuting  intolerance.  The&' 
harsh  and  oppressive  measures  had,  however,  as  might  hav, 
been  expected,  an  effect  the  very  reverse  of  that  which  their 
authors  intended.  Some  of  timid  and  wavering  minds  might 
be  terriffed  and  subdued;  but  the  bolder  and  more  high- 
principled  men  became  only  the  more  determined  in  pro- 
portion to  the  severity  and  intolerance  of  the  treatment 
which  they  had  to  encounter.  In  their  indignation  they 
began  to  entertain  feelings  and  opinions  from  which  they 
would  have  shrunk,  had  they  not  been  driven  to  extremities. 
Ceasing  to  complain  of  Popish  vestments  and  ceremonies, 
and  to  supplicate  a  further  reformation,  some  began  to  ques- 
tion whether  the  Church  of  England  ought  to  be  regarded 


46  PIISTO.CY    OF    THE 

as  a  true  Church,  and  her  ministers  true  Christian  ministers. 
They  not  only  renounced  communion  with  her  in  her  forms 
of  prayer  and  her  ceremonies,  but  also  in  the  dispensation 
of  word  and  ordinance. 

The  leader  of  these  men  of  extreme  views  was  Robert 
Brown,  a  person  who  held  a  charge  in  the  diocese  of  Nor- 
wich, whose  family  connexions  gave  him  considerable  influ- 
ence, and  procured  him  protection,  he  being  nearly  related 
to  Lord  Treasurer  Cecil.  Brown  appears  to  have  been  a 
man  of  hot  and  impetuous  temper,  rash  and  variable  except 
when  opposed,  and  then  headstrong  and  overbearing. 
Throwing  himself  headlong  into  the  Puritan  controversy, 
he  traversed  the  country  from  place  to  place,  pouring  out 
the  most  fierce  and  bitter  invectives  against  the  whole  Pre- 
latic  party,  and  also  against  all  who  could  not  concur  v/ith 
him  in  the  rude  violence  of  his  mode  of  warfare. 

After  repeated  imprisonments,  and  many  attempts  to 
form  a  new  part}'^,  he  at  last  partially  succeeded  in  collect 
ing  a  small  body  of  like-minded  adherents  ;  but  was  soon 
afterwards  compelled  to  leave  the  kingdom,  and  to  with- 
draw to  Holland  with  a  portion  of  his  followers.  There 
he  formed  a  Church  according  to  his  own  fancy ;  but  it 
Avas  soon  torn  to  pieces  with  internal  dissension,  and 
Brown  returned  again  to  England,  and  exhibiting  one  of 
those  recoils  by  no  means  rare  with  men  of  vehement 
temperament,  he  renounced  his  principles  of  separation, 
conformed  to  that  worship  which  he  had  so  violently  as- 
sailed, and  became  rector  of  a  parish  in  Northamptonshire. 
The  remainder  of  his  life  was  by  no  means  distinguished 
by  correctness  of  deportment,  or  purity  of  manners  j  and 
at  length  he  terminated  his  unhonored  days  in  the  county 
jail,  in  the  eighty-first  year  of  his  age.*  From  this  per- 
son the  first  form  of  what  has  since  been  termed  the  Inde- 
pendent, or  Congregational  system  of  Church  government, 
appears  to  have  had  its  origin,  the  great  majority  of  the 
Puritans  either  retaining  their  connection  with  the  Church 
of  England  in  a  species  of  constrained  half-conformity,  or 
associating  on  the  Presbyterian  model.  Brown  not  only 
renounced  communion  with  the  Church  of  England,  but 
also  Avith  all  others  of  the  reformed  Churches  who  would 
not  adopt  the  model  which  he  had  constructed.  The  main 
•  Neal,  vol.  i.  pp.  245-247;   Fuller,  vol.  iii.  pp.  61-65. 


WESTMINSTKR    ASSEMBLY.  4<1 

principles  of  that  model  were,  that  every  church  ought  to 
be  confined  within  a  single  congregation;  that  its  govern- 
ment should  be  the  most  complete  democracy  ;  and  that 
there  was  no  distinction  in  point  of  order  between  the 
office-bearers  and  the  ordinary  members,  so  that  a  vote  (V 
the  congregation  was  enough  to  constitute  any  man  an 
office-bearer,  and  to  entitle  him  to  preach  and  administer 
the  sacraments.  Those  who  adopted  these  opinions,  and 
formed  Congregational  Churches  on  the  same  model,  were 
at  first  termed  Brown ists,  and  were  regarded  by  the  main 
body  of  the  Puritans  with  nearly  as  much  dislike  as  they 
were  by  the  Prelatists. 

In  stating  that  the  Independent  or  Congregational  system 
of  Church  government  may  be  said  to  have  originated  with 
Robert  Brown,  it  is  not  meant  that  those  w4io  at  present 
adhere  to  that  form  of  ecclesiastical  policy  are  Brownists, 
as  that  term  was  applied  at  first ;  but  merely  that  Brown 
appears  to  have  been  the  first  who  actually,  in  the  forma- 
tion of  a  Church,  embodied  that  idea,  and  that  too  in  a 
much  more  rigid  and  repulsive  form  than  it  subsequently 
assumed,  when  again  taken  up  and  reconstructed  by  wiser 
and  better  men.  But  it  is  of  importance  to  mark  begin- 
nings, especially  when  these  teach  lessons  of  great  practi- 
cal value.  One  of  these  may  be  here  very  easily  learned. 
The  extreme  pertinacity  with  which  the  queen  and  her 
obsequious  servants  the  bishops  strove  to  enforce  entire 
conformity,  produced  an  antagonist  principle,  whose  very 
essence  was  direct  antipathy  to  their  eager  wish,  render 
ing  it  for  ever  impossible  that  their  purpose  could  be  ac 
r.omplished.  Another  remark  may  be  made ;  the  systeip 
devised  by  Brown  was,  in  its  first  appearance,  altogether 
as  intolerant,  both  in  principle  and  in  practice,  as  that  of 
its  opponent.  Prelacy  ;  but  in  the  stern  strife  which  af- 
terwards ensued  between  these  equally  intolerant  anta- 
gonists, they  so  far  neutralized  each  other,  as  to  give 
occasion  to  the  gradual,  though  even  yet  incomplete, 
development  of  the  great  principle  of  religious  tolera- 
tion— a  principle  utterly  unknown  to  any  party  at  the 
time,  even  Avhile  its  rainbow-form  was  beginning  to  bend 
its  gentle  radiance  across  the  thunder-gloom  of  their 
contention. 

[1583.]    The    death   of  Archbishop  Grindal    gave   the 


4-8  HISTORY    OF    THE 

queen  an  opportunity  of  promoting  to  that  influential  sta- 
tion which  he  had  held  a  person  more  according  to  her 
own  mind,  who  would  feel  no  compunction  in  proceeding 
to  extremities  against  the  Puritans.     Her  choice  was  easily 
mf  de.     Whitgift  had  already  distinguished  himself  by  his 
controversial  writings  against  Cartwright,   and  was  well 
prepared  to  enforce  by  power  what  he  had  failed  to  accom- 
plish by  argument.     Scarcely  was  Whitgift  placed  in  his 
seat   of  power,  when  he  began  to   show  how  that  power 
would  be  used.     He  drew  up  and  published  three  articles, 
requiring  that  none  be  permitted  to  preach,  or  execute  any 
part  of  the  ecclesiastical  function,  unless  he  should  sub- 
scribe them.     These  articles  were  to  the  following  effect : 
— 1st,  The  queen'  s  supremacy  over  all  persons,  and  in  all 
causes,  civil   and  ecclesiastical.     2(/,  That   the  Book  of 
Common  Prayer  and  of  Ordination  contained  nothing  con- 
trary to  the  Word  of   God  ;  and  that  they  will  use  it,  and 
no   other.      3(/,  Implicit   subscription   of    the  Thirty-nine 
Articles.*     The  Puritans  would  readily  have  acknowledged 
the    queen's    supremacy    over     all    persons,    and   in    all 
causes  civil,  but  not  in  causes  ecclesiastical  j  the  second 
article  they  could  not  subscribe  ;  the  third  they  were  ready 
to  subscribe  with  little  difficulty.    But  they  were  all  rigidly 
enforced  ;  and  in  a  short  time  several  hundreds  of  the  best 
ministers  in  England  were  suspended  for  not  subscribing. 
Not  thinking  even  this  sufficient,  Whitgift  applied  to  the 
queen  to  institute  a  new  High  Commission,  that  he  might 
be  enabled  to  wield  a  direct  and  irresistible  power.     She 
readily  consented,  and  even  gave  to  it  an  additional  ele- 
ment of   despotism,  empowering    the    commissioners  to 
impose  an  oath  ex  officio, — by  means    of  which  persons 
accused  were  bound,  on  their  oath,  to  answer  questions 
against  themselves,  and  thus  become  their  own  accusers, 
or  to  be  punished,  by  fine  or  imprisonment,  for  refusing  to 
take  such  an  oath,  or  to  criminate  themselves.     The  pre- 
latic  inquisition  was  now  complete  in  its   apparatus,  and 
Whitgift  was  well  qualified  to  act  as  the  grand  inquisitor 
[1584.]  The  work  of  oppression  went   on  now  rapidly. 
Mercy  to  preachers  or  people  there  was  none.     Elizabeth's 
wisest  statesmen  stood  aghast,  when  they  beheld  the  deso- 
lating effect  of  Whitgift's  measures ;  but  they  interposed  in 
•  Nea!,  vol.  i.  pp.  2G0-263  ;  Fuller,  vol.  iii.  p.  68. 


WESTMIxNSTER    ASSEMBLY.  49 

vain.  Cecil,  Burleigh,  and  Walsing-ham,  had  less  influence 
with  the  queen  than  Whitgift ;  because  their  advice  was 
but  accordant  with  the  dictates  of  prudence  and  Chris- 
tianity,— his  with  those  of  vanity  and  despotism.  When 
Parliament  met,  the  House  of  Commons  attempted  to  stem 
the  tide  of  persecution  ;  and  having  received  several  peti- 
tions from  the  Puritans,  they  prepared  various  bills  to 
abridge  the  power  of  the  bishop^,  to  reform  abuses,  and  to 
promote  discipline-  But,  with  considerable  dexterity, 
Whitgift  suggested  to  the  queen,  that  if  the  Parliament 
were  to  pass  any  such  measures,  they  could  not  be  repealed 
by  any  other  authority,  whereas,  whatsoever  she  should  her- 
self, or  by  the  convocation,  enact,  her  own  authority  could 
at  any  time  repeal.*  Elizabeth  welcomed  the  suggestion. 
She  reprimanded  the  Commons  for  interfering  with  eccle- 
siastical matters,  which  was  touching  her  prerogative,  and 
they  w^ere  compelled  to  yield. 

[1586.]  The  Puritans,  thus  driven  from  all  legislative 
remedy,  yet  regarded  it  as  their  duty,  in  their  character  of 
Christian  teachers,  to  exert  themselves  to  the  utmost  for 
their  own  improvement,  and  for  the  instruction  and  refor- 
mation of  the  ignorant  and  neglected  people.  They  accord- 
ingly formed  a  Book  of  Discipline,  for  their  own  direction 
in  the  discharge  of  their  ministerial  and  pastoral  duties  j 
and  this  book  was  subscribed  by  above  five  hundred  of  the 
most  eminently  pious  and  faithful  ministers  in  the  king- 
dom.f  This  body  was  far  too  numerous  and  important  to 
be  easily  or  wantonly  crushed ;  and  yet,  as  Neal  informs 
us,  it  formed,  in  reality,  but  a  small  portion  of  those  over 
whom  the  terrors  of  suspension  at  that  period  hung, 
amounting  to  not  less  than  a  third  part  of  the  ministers 
of  England. 

[1588.]  A  new  principle  was  now  promulgated  for  the 
support  of  prelatic  power,  of  a  more  formidable  nature  than 
any  that  had  hitherto  appeared,  and  destined  to  produce 
the  most  disastrous  results.  Dr.  Bancroft,  the  archbishop's 
chaplain,  in  a  sermon  which  he  preached  at  Paul's  Cross, 
January  12,  1588,  maintained  that.bishops  were  a  distinct 
order  from  priests   or  presbyters,  and  had  authority  over 


Life  of  Whit-ift,  p.  198.  f  Neal,  vol.  i.  pp.  314,  315. 

5 


50  HISTORY    OF    THE 

them  jure  divino^  and  directly  from  God.*  This  bold 
assertion  created  an  immense  ferment  throug-hout  the  king- 
dom. The  Puritans  saw  well,  that,  if  acted  upon,  this 
principle  would  increase  their  oppression  to  an  incalcula- 
ble degree,  inasmuch  as  it  must  subject  them  to  an  accu- 
sation of  heresy,  in  addition  to  that  of  resistance  to  the 
queen's  supremacy.  The  greater  part  of  even  the  prelatic 
party  themselves  were  startled  with  the  novelty  of  the 
doctrine ;  for  none  of  the  English  reformers  had  ever 
regarded  the  order  of  bishops  as  anything  else  but  a  hu- 
man institution,  appointed  for  the  more  orderly  government 
of  the  Church,  and  they  were  not  prepared  at  once  to  con- 
demn as  heretical  all  Churches  where  that  institution  did 
not  exist.  Whitgift  himself,  perceiving  the  use  which 
might  be  made  of  such  a  tenet,  said,  that  the  Doctor's  ser- 
mon had  done  much  good, — though,  for  his  own  part,  he 
rather  wished  than  believed  it  to  be  true.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  legal  assertors  of  the  queen's  supremacy  assailed 
this  theory,  as  subversive  of  her  majesty's  prerogative ; 
for,  as  they  reasoned,  if  the  bishops  are  not  under-gover- 
Rors  to  her  majesty  of  the  clergy,  but  superior  governors 
over  their  brethren,  by  God's  ordinance,  it  will  then  follow 
that  her  majesty  is  not  supreme  governor  over  her  clergy, 
Bancroft  answered,  that  this  inference  was  not  a  necessary 
consequence  of  his  doctrine;  because  the  sovereign's  au- 
thority may,  and  very  often  does,  corroborate  that  which 
is  primarily  from  the  law  of  God.  This  evasive  reply 
seems  to  have  satisfied  the  queen,  aided,  perhaps,  by  her 
own  knowledge  of  its  direct  purpose,  and  of  the  character 
of  her  bishops,  who  longed  for  the  extirpation  of  Puritan 
ism,  but  had  no  desire  to  encounter  her  leonine  wralh. 
The  terrific  power  of  this  despotic  principle  did  not,  indeed, 
appear  till  after  the  lapse  of  two  generations, — when, 
wielded  by  Laud,  it  convulsed  the  kingdom,  and  overthrew 
the  monarchy.  Its  portentous  reappearance  in  modern 
times  may  well  excite  alarm  ;  embodying,  as  it  does,  the 
very  essence  of  despotism,  civil  and  religious,  and  possess- 
ing an  energy  that  nothing  human  can  control  without  «i 
struggle,  wide,  wasting,  *  and  deadly, — too  fearful  even  to 
be  imagined. 

•  Life  of  Whitgift,  p.  292;    Collier,  vol.  ii.  p.  609 ;   Neal,  vol.  i.  pp. 
321-323. 


■WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBLY.  51 

[lf)S9.J  The  struggle  assumed  a  less  serious  aspect  for 
a  short  time,  in  consequence  of  the  publication  of  the 
famous  ]\Iartin  Mar-Prelate  Tracts.  Some  of  the  Puritan 
party  had  ?^jrocured  a  printing-press,  the  liberty  ol  the  press 
having  brrn  taken  away  previously,  and  commenced  a 
s  ries  of  pamphlets,  containing  attacks  of  wit,  ridicule, 
mockery,  rnd  keen  vituperation,  against  the  bishops  and 
their  supporters.  Many  of  these  tracts  displayed  very 
considerable  power  of  sarcasm  and  invective  ;  and  as  they 
were  written  intentionally  for  the  mass  of  the  nation,  they 
were  com]  osed  in  a  style  not  merely  plain,  but  affectedly 
rude  and  vulgar.  Th^y  were  not,  however,  to  be  despised. 
Amidst  mi;ch  coarse  vituperation,  they  contained  state- 
ments of  facts  which  could  not  be  disputed,  set  forth  with 
such  home-thrusting  vigor  as  caused  every  direct  and 
strong-aimed  blow  to  ♦ell  upon  the  assailed  prelates.  Great 
was  the  indignation  aiid  dismay  of  the  bishops  and  their 
friends,  and  every  e^vertion  was  made  to  detect  and  seize 
the  hidden  armory  of  this  unseen  aesailant.  For  a  consi- 
derable time  thepe  efforts  were  unsuccessful,  and  the  pre- 
latic  party  were  constrained  to  attempt  their  own  defence 
in  literary  uarfare.  But  although  they  displayed  conside- 
rable talent  and  activity  in  this  attempt,  they  were  not  able 
to  match  their  unknown  antagonists,  whose  writings  pro- 
duced a  deep  and  wide-spread  impression  on  the  public 
mind.  At  length  the  Martin  Mar  Prelate  press  was  seized, 
with  several  unfinished  tracts,  and  that  aspect  of  the  strug- 
gle terminated,  but  not  till  the  Prelatic  cause  had  sustained 
very  considerable  injury. 

In  the  year  1591  the  i'arliament  again  met,  and  the  House 
of  Commons  once  more  attempted  to  rescue  the  suffering 
Puritans,  by  instituting  an  inquiry  into  the  conduct  of  the 
High  Commission,  in  imposing  oaths  and  subscriptions  not 
sanctioned  bylaw.  The  queen  was  highly  incensed,  com- 
manded them  not  to  meddle  with  matters  of  state  or  causes 
ecclesiastical,  and  threw  several  of  the  members,  and  even 
the  attorney-general,  into  prison.  The  Parliament,  with  a 
tameness  unworthy  of  the  spirit  of  free-born  Englishmen, 
not  merely  yielded,  but  passed  an  act  for  the  suppression 
of  conventicles,  by  which  was  meant  all  religious  meetings, 
except  such  as  the  queen  and  the  bishops  were  pleased  to 
permit,  on  pain  of  perpetual  banishment.    The  principle  of 


52  HISTORY    OF    THE 

this  act  was  of  the  most  despotic  nature,  converting  any 
difference  from  the  religion  of  the  sovereign  into  a  crime 
against  the  State,  and  rendering  the  mere  want  of  confor- 
mity equivalent  to  a  proof  of  direct  opposition.  Great  num- 
bers were  subjected  to  the  most  grievous  sufferings  through 
this  enactment.  Some  went  into  voluntary  exile,  to  escape 
the  horrors  of  imprisonment  ;  some  endured  a  lengthened 
captivity,  and  then  were  banished  ;  and  some,  chiefly  of 
the  Brownists,  were  condemned  to  death,  and  on  the  scaf- 
fold declared  their  loyalty  to  their  sovereign,  while  they 
ceased  not  to  testify  against  the  tyranny  of  the  prelates. 

[1595.]  The  controversy  between  the  High  Churchmen 
and  the  Puritans  obtained  the  full  development  of  all  its 
main  principles  in  the  year  1595.  At  this  time  Dr.  Bound 
published  a  treatise  on  the  Sabbath  ;  in  which  he  maintained 
its  perpetual  sanctity,  as  a  day  of  rest  equally  from  business 
and  recreation,  that  it  might  be  devoted  wholly  to  the  wor- 
ship of  God.*  Ail  the  Puritans  assented  to  this  doctrine, 
while  the  Prelatists  accused  it  as  both  an  undue  restraint 
of  Christian  liberty  and  an  improper  exalting  of  the  Sabbath 
above  the  other  festivals  appointed  by  the  Church.  About 
the  same  time  a  controversy  arose  in  Cambridge  respecting 
those  doctrinal  points  which  form  the  leading  distinctions 
between  the  Arminian  and  the  Calvinistic  systems  of  theo- 
logy. Till  this  period  there  had  existed  no  doubt  in  the 
minds  of  any  of  the  English  divines  that  the  Thirty-nine 
Articles  were  decidedly  and  intentionally  Calvinistic.  In- 
deed they  could  ha/e  no  other  opinion  ;  because  they  were 
perfectly  aware  how  much  influence  the  writings  of  Calvin 
exercised  over  the  minds  of  those  by  whom  these  Articles 
were  framed.  After  the  controversy  had  prevailed  in  the 
university  a  short  time,  an  appeal  was  made  to  Vvhitgift, 
who,  with  the  aid  of  other  learned  divines,  prepared  nine 
propositions,  commonly  called  The  Lambeth  Articles,  to 
which  all  the  scholars  in  the  university  were  strictly  enjoin- 
od  to  conform  their  judgments.!  These  Lambeth  Articles 
were  more  strictly  Calvinistic  than  Calvin  himself  would 
have  desired  ;  and  certainly  prove  that,  in  its  early  period, 
the  Church  of  England  was  anything  but  Arminian,  what- 
ever it  may  have  since  become.  But  though  Whitgift  was 
himself  still  a  thorough  Calvinist,  considerable  numbers  of 
*  Fuller,  vol.  iii.  pp.  143-146.  f  Fuller,  vol.  iii.  pp.  147-150. 


WESTIMhNSTKR    ASSKMBO.  53 

the  Prelatic  party  were  veering  towards  Arniinianism  ;  so 
that,  partly  on  that  account,  and  partly  on  account  of  tlieir 
more  strict  observance  of  the  Sabbath  sanctity,  the  Puritans 
were  now  led  to  a  more  important  field  of  conflict  than  that 
on  which  they  had  hitherto  striven  aijiiinst  their  antagonists, 
and  instead  of  contending  about  vestments  and  ceremonies, 
they  now  strove  respecting  great  and  important  doctrines, 
and  began  to  be  termed  Doctrinal  i^uritans.  This  led  to 
two  directly  opposite  results.  Il  caused  the  Prelatists  to 
swerve  more  and  more  widely  from  those  doctrines  which 
tlie  Puritans  maintained  ;  and  it  impelled  the  Puritans  to 
prosecute  a  profound  study  of  those  points,  which  had  thus 
become  the  elements  of  controversy.  This  may  account 
for  the  remarkable  power  and  accuracy  with  which  the 
Puritan  divines  of  that  and  the  Succeeding  generation  state 
and  explain  the  most  solemn  and  profound  truths  of  the 
Christian  revelation. 

At  length  what  may  be  termed  a  cessation  of  hostilities 
ensued.  The  queen  was  now  evidently  sinking  under  the 
infirmities  of  age,  and  both  parties  began  to  speculate  on 
the  probable  measures  which  might  be  adopted  by  her 
successor,  James  VI.  of  Scotland.  The  Puritans  hoped 
that  his  Presbyterian  education  might  predispose  him  to 
be  favorable  to  their  v^iews ;  and  the  Prelatic  party  were 
unwilling  to  exasperate,  by  continued  sev^erity,  those  who 
might  possibly,  ere  long,  be  the  ruling  body  in  the  Church. 
Both  parties  paused,  at  least  in  action  ;  but  there  is  no 
reason  to  suppose  that  their  feelings  of  mutual  jealousy  and 
dislike  were  abated.  Nor  was  it  consistent  with  the  usual 
policy,  or  king-craft  of  James,  to  declare  his  sentiments 
and  intentions,  but  rather  to  hold  out  plausible  grounds  of 
expectation  to  both  parties, — thereby  to  secure  the  support 
of  boUi,  or  at  least  to  disarm  the  direct  hostility  of  either. 

[1603.]  Queen  Elizabeth  died  on  the  24.th  day  of  March, 
IG03,  in  the  seventieth  year  of  her  age,  and  forty-fifth  of 
her  reign.  In  the  following  month  James  left  his  native 
land,  commencing  his  journey  to  London  to  take  posses- 
sion of  the  English  throne,  to  which  he  v.'as  now  the  direct 
heir.  On  his  progress  southward,  the  Puritan  ministers 
availed  themselves  of  the  opportunity  to  lay  before  him 
what  is  commonly  termed  the  Millenary  Petition.  This 
name  it  did  not  receive  because  it  was  signed  by  onethou- 
5* 


54  HISTORY    OF    THE 

sand  ministers,  for  the  actual  number  was  seven  hundred 
and  fifty  j  but  because,  in  the  preamble,  it  is  said  by  the 
petitioners,  "That  they,  to  the  number  of  more  than  a 
thousand  ministers,  groaned  under  the  burden  of  human 
rites  and  ceremonies,  and  cast  themselves  at  his  majesty's 
feet  for  relief."  That  their  number  was  not  overstated  is 
evident  from  the  fact  that  the  petition  was  subscribed  by 
the  ministers  of  no  more  than  twenty-five  counties,  chiefly 
those  of  the  northern,  westland,  and  midland  parts  of  the 
kingdom;  so  that  probably  not  more  than  one-half  of  the 
Puritan  ministers  had  an  opportunity  of  signing  their  mil- 
lenary petition.* 

On  the  other  hand,  the  Prelatic  party  were  at  least  equally 
strenuous  in  their  endeavors  to  secure  his  majesty's  favor ; 
and,  as  might  be  expected  from  their  practised  courtier- 
arts  and  ready  obsequiousness,  were  more  successful.  But 
as  James  hud  given  a  friendly  reception  to  both  parties, 
and  as  he  was  vain  of  his  own  acquirements  in  theology, 
and  of  his  skill  in  polemical  discussions,  which  he  wished 
to  exhibit  to  his  new  subjects,  he  thought  proper  to 
appoint  a  conference  between  the  two  parties,  to  be  con- 
ducted in  his  own  presence,  as  final  judge  in  all  such  mat- 
ters. This  gave  occasion  to  the  famous  Hampton  Court 
Conference,  an  account  of  which  was  afterwards  published 
by  Dr.  Barlow,  Dean  of  Chester,  one  of  the  disputants  on 
the  Prelatic  side.  The  Puritans  complained  that  Barlow 
gave  a  partial  account  of  this  conference,  representing  the 
Prelatic  arguments  in  the  best  manner  of  which  they  could 
admit,  and  weakening  and  abridging  those  of  the  opposite 
party.  Even  from  the  outline  given  by  Fuller  and  Collier 
this  is  evident  ;  and  yet  so  futile  are  the  arguments  of  the 
king  and  the  prelates,  that  one  is  ashamed  to  read  them,  as 
reproduced  by  their  own  historians.  In  Barlow's  own  treat- 
ise, which  is  now  lying  before  me,  the  mean  and  abject 
servility  of  manner,  and  the  gross  and  fulsome  flattery  of 
language,  employed  by  the  prelates  towards  James,  are 
such  as  to  cause  the  cheek  of  every  person  of  generous 
and  manly  nature  to  burn  with  indignant  scorn.  A  very 
brief  account  of  this  conference  is  all  that  can  be  given  here 
The  place  appointed  for  this  conference  was  the  drawing- 

♦  Fuller,  vol.  iii.  p.  172 ;  Collier,  vol.  ii.  p.  672 ;  Neal,  vol.  i.  pp.  391, 
392. 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBLY.  55 

room  at  Hampton  Court.  On  the  high  Church  side  the 
disputants  were, — the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  Whit- 
pift ;  bisliops,  Bancroft  of  London,  JMatthew  of  Durham, 
Bilson  of  Winchester,  Babington  of  Worcester,  Rudd  of 
St.  David's,  Watson  of  Chichester,  Robinson  of  Carlisle, 
and  Dove  of  Peterborough  ;  deans,  Andrews  of  the  Chapel, 
Gveral  of  St.  Paul's,  Barlow  of  Chester,  and  Bridges  of 
Salisbury;  and  Dr.  Field  and  Dr.  King.  On  the  part  of 
the  Puritans  there  were  only  four  ministers,  — Dr.  Reynolds 
and  Dr.  Sparks,  professors  of  divinity  in  Oxford ;  and  Mr. 
Chadderton  and  Mr.  Knewstubbs  of  Cambridge.  The  first 
day  was  a  conference  between  the  king  and  the  prelates, 
in  which  his  majesty  praised  the  Church  of  England,  and 
expressed  his  wish  for  satisfaction  on  a  few  points  in  the 
Prayer-Book,  respecting  excommunication,  and  about  pro- 
viding mhiisters  for  Ireland.  By  this  an  opportunity  was 
given  to  the  king  and  the  prelates  to  form  a  mutual  under- 
standing before  they  encountered  their  opponents.  On  the 
second  day  Dr.  Reynolds  stated,  in  the  name  of  the 
Puritans,  and  in  the  briefest  possible  form,  the  points  on 
which  the  controversy  chiefly  turned,  humbly  requesting, — 
"  1.  That  the  doctrine  of  the  Church  might  be  preserved 
in  purity,  according  to  God's  Word.  2.  That  good  pastors 
might  be  planted  in  all  churches  to  preach  the  same. 
3.  That  the  Church  government  might  be  sincerely  minis- 
tered, according  to  God's  Word.  4.  That  the  Book  of 
Common  Prayer  might  be  fitted  to  more  increase  of  piety."* 
Had  these  points  been  fairly  discussed,  the  whole  con- 
troversy might  have  been  investigated,  and  some  approxi- 
mation might  have  been  made  towards  an  agreement,  or  at 
least  a  pacific  arrangement,  between  the  contending  par- 
tics.  But  the  king  interrupted,  reviled,  and  stormed  j  the 
courtiers  laughed  and  mocked  ;  and  the  prelates,  by  insinua- 
tions, interruptions,  flatteries  addressed  to  the  king,  and 
sneers  directed  against  the  Puritans,  succeeded  in  prevent- 
ing such  a  discussion  as  would  have  brought  out  the  great 
principles  of  the  controversy,  and  in  assisting  to  overbear 
the  Puritans  with  insult  and  ridicule.  The  king  repeated 
his  favorite  maxim — "  No  bishop,  no  king  j"  and,  at  the 
close  of  the  day,  asked  Dr.  Reynolds  if  he  had  anything 
else  to  off'er.  He,  perceiving  the  futility  6f  continuing 
•  Hampton  Court  Conference,  p.  23. 


56  HISTORY    OF    THE 

such  a  discussion,  answered,  "  No  more,  please  your 
majesty."  "  Then,"  said  the  king-,  "  if  this  be  all  your 
party  have  to  say,  I  will  make  them  conform,  or  1  will 
harrie  (spoil)  them  out  of  the  land,  or  else  do  worse." 

The  greater  part  of  the  third  day's  conference  was  oc- 
cupied by  the  king  and  the  prelates  in  matters  relating  to 
the  High  Commission,  the  oath  ex  officio  and  the  slight  al- 
terations proposed  in  the  Prayer-Book.  Of  all  these  the 
king  expressed  his  approbation  ;  and  then  the  Puritan  di- 
vines were  again  called  into  this  mock  conference.  They 
now  knew  that  no  alterations  such  as  they  had  desired 
would  be  obtained  j  and,  therefore,  they  contented  them- 
selves with  supplicating  some  concessions  in  point  of  con- 
formity, in  behalf  of  those  ministers  who  could  not  in  con- 
science submit  to  the  rites  and  ceremonies  of  the  Church. 
The  king  sternly  declared  that  they  must  conform,  and 
that  quickly  too,  or  they  should  hear  of  it.  Thus  ended 
the  Hampton  Court  Conference,  "which,"  says  Dr.  War- 
ner, "  convinced  the  Puritans  that  they  were  mistaken  in 
depending  on  the  king's  protection;  which  convinced  the 
king  that  they  were  not  to  be  won  by  a  few  insignificant 
concessions;  and  which,  if  it  did  not  convince  the  privy 
council  and  the  bishops  that  they  had  got  a  Solomon  for 
their  king,  yet  they  spoke  of  him  as  though  it  did."* 
Even  this  does  not  fully  express  the  extravagant  strain  of 
adulation  in  which  they  spoke.  The  Archbishop  of  Can- 
terbury (AYhitgift)  said  "that  undoubtedly  his  majesty 
spake  by  the  special  assistance  of  God's  Spirit."  Ban- 
croft, Bishop  of  London,  "upon  his  knee  protested,  that 
his  heart  melted  within  him  with  joy,  and  made  haste  to 
acknowledge  to  Almighty  God  the  singular  mercy  we 
have  received  at  his  hands,  in  giving  us  such  a  king,  as 
since  Christ  his  time  the  like  he  thought  hath  not  been."f 
Little  wonder  that  the  vain  and  pedantic  monarch  was  de- 
lighted with  his  bishops. 

[1604.]  In  the  Convocation  which  met  in  1604,  Ban- 
croft presided,  Whitgift  having  died  a  short  time  previ- 
ously. Soon  after  they  met,  Bancroft  laid  before  them  a 
Book  of  Canons,  collected  out  of  the  articles,  injunctions, 
and  synodical  acts  passed  in  the  reigns  of  Edward  and 
*  Ecclesiastical  History,  vol.  iii.  p.  482. 
t  Hampton  Court  Conference,  pp.  93,  94. 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEMI5LY.  57 

Elizabeth,  to  the  mimhcr  of  one  liundred  and  forty-one. 
To  these  canons  both  Houses  of  Convocation  assented, 
and  they  were  ratified  by  the  king's  letters  patent,  but  not 
confirmed  by  act  of  Parliament,  so  that,  though  binding 
on  the  clergy,  they  have  not  the  force  of  statute  laws. 
Of  these  canons,  about  three  dozen  are  expressly  directed 
aoainst  the  Puritan  opinions,  rendering  their  junction 
with  the  Church  impossible  without  sacrifice  of  con- 
science ;  and  one  of  them  requires  that  no  person  be  or- 
dained, or  sufiered  to  preach  or  catechize,  unless  he  first 
subscribe  willinfrly,  and  ex  animo^  the  three  articles  already 
mentioned  as  \Vhitgift's  articles. 

Bancroft  was  promoted  to  the  archbishopric  of  Canter- 
bury, vacant  by  Whitgift's  decease,  and  immediately  proved 
how  well  quaiilied  he  was  to  discharge  the  function  of 
grand  inquisitor.  He  enforced  subscription  to  canons  and 
articles  with  the  utmost  rigor,  silencing  or  deposing  those 
Puritan  ministers  who  refused  to  comply.  Considerable 
numbers  were  thus  reduced  to  the  greatest  distress,  and 
some  were  driven  into  foreign  countries  to  escape  from 
persecution  in  their  own.  And  that  the  archbishop's  per- 
secuting zeal  might  obtain  as  full  a  sanction  as  could  be 
given  to  it  by  a  partial  and  one-sided  process,  the  king 
summoned  the  twelve  judges  to  the  Star-Chamber,  and,  in 
answer  to  three  interrogative  propositions,  obtained  as  their 
legal  opinion.  That  the  King  having  the  supreme  ecclesi- 
astical power,  could,  without  Parliament,  make  orders  and 
constitutions  for  Church  government ;  that  the  High  Com- 
mission might  enforce  them,  ex  officio^  without  libel;  and 
that  subjects  viight  not  frame  petitions  for  relief  without  being 
guilty  of  an  ojjhice  finable  at  discretion,  and  very  near  to  trea- 
son and  felony* 

This  strange  opinion  ascribed  to  the  king  power  in  ec- 
clesiastical matters  of  the  most  arbitrary  and  despotic 
kin-d,  without  limitation  or  redress;  and  as  the  enforce- 
ment of  it  necessarily  required  the  exercise  of  civil  power 
in  the  infliction  of  punishment,  it  deprived  one  large  class 
of  subjects  of  all  liberty,  civil  and  sacred,  and  if  allowed 
in  one  class,  might  naturally  introduce  an  equal  exercise 
of  despotism  over  every  other.  This  may  be  regarded  as 
perhaps  the  first  distinct  intimation  to  the  kingdom  at 
*  Neal,  vol.  i.  pp.  416,417. 


58  Hi  STORY    OF    THE 

large  of  the  peri]  in  which  civil  liberty  was  placed  by  the 
arbitrary  proceedings  of  the  sovereign  and  the  prelates  in 
religious  affairs  ;  and  it  is  not  undeserving  of  notice,  that 
it  was  founded  on  the  opinion  of  civil  judges,  who,  in  their 
interpretation  of  law,  were  the  subverters  of  the  constitu- 
tion, and  the  destroyers  of  both  civil  and  religious  liberty. 

In  consequence  of  the  authority  thus  acquired,  the  pre- 
lates urged  on  their  persecuting  career  with  double  eager- 
ness and  severity  ;  and  the  Puritans  became,  in  conse- 
quence, so  much  the  more  determined  in  their  adherence 
to  their  principles.  Not  merely  suffering,  hut  calumny  of 
the  grossest  l<ind,  was  their  portion  ;  and  ambitious  church- 
men found  that  the  readiest  road  to  preferment  in  the 
Church  was  to  pour  forth  violent  invectives  and  dark  as- 
persions against  the  detested  Puritans.  As  an  answer  to 
these  reproaches,  and  to  vindicate  their  character,  the 
Puritans  published  a  treatise  entitled  "  English  Puritanism," 
which  Dr.  Ames  (better  known  by  his  Latinised  name 
Amesius)  translated  into  Latin  for  the  information  of  for- 
eign Churches.  It  contains  a  very  full  and  impartial 
statement  of  the  peculiar  opinions  of  the  much  calumni- 
ated Puritans  ;  and  ought  to  be  enough  to  vindicate  them 
in  the  judgment  of  every  candid  and  intelligent  person. 

[1610.]  The  violent  proceedings  of  the  Prelatic  party, 
and  the  dangerous  nature  of  the  principles  avowed  by  them, 
began  to  arouse  the  kingdom  to  a  sense  of  the  danger  to 
w^hich  all  liberty  was  exposed ;  and  the  Parliament  pre- 
pared to  interpose,  and  to  seek  redress  of  grievances  which 
were  becoming  intolerable.  But  the  king  met  all  their  re- 
monstrances and  petitions  for  redress  with  the  most  lofty 
assertions  of  his  royal  prerogative,  in  the  exercise  ofw^hich 
he  held  himself  to  be  accountable  to  God  alone,  affirming 
it  to  be  sedition  in  a  subject  to  dispute  what  a  king  might 
do  in  the  height  of  his  power.  The  Parliament  repeated 
the  assertion  of  their  own  rights,  accused  the  High  Com- 
mission of  illegal  and  tyrannical  conduct,  and  advocated  a 
more  mild  and  merciful  course  of  procedure  towards  the 
Puritans.  Offended  with  the  aw^akening  spirit  of  freedom 
thus  displayed,  the  king,  by  the  advice  of  Bancroft,  dis- 
solved the  Parliament,  resolved  to  govern,  if  possible,  with- 
out parliaments  in  future.  This  arbitrary  conduct  on  the 
part  of  James  aroused,  in  the  mind  of  England,  a  deep  and 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBLY.  59^ 

vigilant  jealousy  with  resrard  to  their  sovereign's  inten- 
tions, which  rested  not  till,  in  the  reign  of  his  son,  it  broke 
forth  in  its  strength,  and  overthrew  the  monarchy. 

[1616.]  When  the  Puritans  found,  not  only  no  hope  of 
redress,  but  a  constantly  increasing  severity  of  treatment, 
many  of  them,  as  has  been  stated,  fled  to  the  continent,  and 
there  continued  to  discharge  their  sacred  duties  as  they 
could  find  opportunity.  Embittered  somewhat  by  the  per- 
secution which  they  had  suffered,  and  constrained  to  min- 
ister in  congregations  not  united  in  any  common  body, 
several  of  them  began  to  adopt  the  opinions  at  first  taught 
by  Brown,  to  the  extent,  at  least,  of  regarding  the  Congre- 
gational or  Independent  as  the  best  system  of  Church  gov- 
ernment, though  not,  like  him,  to  the  extent  of  denying 
the  lawfulness  of  any  other.  Of  these  Mr.  Henry  Jacob 
was  one,  who,  having  fled  to  Holland,  became  acquainted 
with  Mr.  Robinson,  pastor  of  a  Congregational  church  at 
Leyden,  and  embraced  his  system.  Returning  to  EnglaM 
in  the  year  1616,  Mr.  Jacob  imparted  his  views  to  several 
others  of  the  sufi^ering  Puritans,  who,  considering  that  there 
was  now  no  prospect  of  a  thorough  national  reformation, 
resolved  to  separate  themselves  entirely  from  the  Church 
of  England,  to  unite  in  Church  fellowship,  and  to  maintain 
the  ordinances  of  Christ  in  what  they  had  come  to  regrard 
as  the  purest  form.  They  met,  and  in  the  most  solemn 
manner jleclared  their  faith,  pledged  themselves  in  a  mutual 
covenant  to  each  other,  and  to  God,  to  walk  together  in  all 
His  ordinances,  as  He  had  already  revealed,  or  should  fur- 
tlier  reveal  them,  chose  Mr.  Jacob  to  be  their  pastor,  elected 
deacons,  and  thus  formed  the  first  congregation  of  English 
Independents.  Such,  and  so  small  was  the  beginning  of  a 
body  which  afterwards  became  so  powerful,  and  influenced 
so  strongly  the  movements  of  the  revolutionary  period.* 

[1618.]  The  strongly  contrasted  tendencies  of  the  two 
contending  parties,  Prelatists  and  Puritans,  were  rendered 
very  apparent  in  the  year  1618,  by  the  publication  of  the 
King's  Book  of  Sports.  This  book  was  drawn  up  by  Bishop 
Moreion,  at  the  kinof's  direction,  and  dated  from  Greenwich, 
May  24,  16  iS.f  The  pretext  for  producing  such  a  book  was, 
that  the  strictness  of  the  Puritans  in  keeping  the  Sabbath- 

•  Neal,  vol.  i.  pp.  461,  462.  f  Fuller,  vol.  iii.  pp.  270-273. 


60  HISTORY    OF    THE 

day  alienated  the  people,  and  left  them  exposed  to  the  temp, 
tations  of  the  Jesuits,  who  took  occasion  to  seduce  them 
back  to  Popery.  To  prevent  this,  his  majesty  proposed, 
not  that  the  people  should  be  more  carefully  instructed  in 
religion,  but  that,  after  divine  service,  they  should  be  in- 
dulged in  such  recreations  as  dancing,  archery,  leaping, 
May-games,  Whitson-ales,  morrice  dances,  setting  up  of 
May-poles,  and  such  like  amusements.  That  the  people 
should  meditate  on  their  religions  duties,  and  prepare  to 
practise  the  instructions  given  them  in  God's  Word,  did 
not  seem  to  his  majesty  at  all  a  desirable  matter, — it  might 
have  led  them  to  favor  Puritanism.  Queen  Elizabeth  dis- 
approved of  preaching,  lest  it  should  teach  the  people  to 
think,  and  perhaps  to  inquire  into  matters  of  state.  King 
James  aimed  at  the  same  result  by  making  their  only  lei- 
sure day,  when  they  might  possibly  attempt  the  dangerous 
practice  of  cultivating  their  minds,  a  day  of  mere  recrea- 
tion. The  reason  is  obvious.  Thinking  men  cannot  be 
slaves  ;  and  both  these  sovereigns  were  desirous  of  esta- 
blishing a  complete  despotism.  Religious  men  must  think, 
and  think  solemnly  and  loftily  ;  therefore,  to  prevent  this, 
religion  must  give  place  to  giddy  mirth,  and  God's  hallowed 
day  must  be  profaned  by  every  kind  of  idle  recreation. 
And  what  must  be  said  of  the  High  Church  party,  who  lent 
their  aid  in  this  fearful  desecration  and  despotic  scheme  1 
Were  they  the  friends  of  pure  and  holy  religion,  of  rational 
improvement,  of  public  freedom  \ 

This  Book  of  Sports,  however,  was  at  first  ordered  to  be 
read  merely  in  the  parish  churches  in  Lancashire  ;  but 
one  author  asserts  that  it  would  have  been  speedily 
extended  over  the  kingdom,  but  for  the  decisive  refusal  of 
Abbot,  who  had  recently  succeeded  Bancroft  in  the  arch- 
bishopric of  Canterbury.  But  though  a  partial  enforcement 
of  this  desecrating  production  was  all  that  it  could,  at 
that  time,  obtain,  its  promulgation  gave  serious  ground  of 
dissatisfaation  and  dread  to  all  the  more  decidedly  pious 
persons  in  the  kingdom,  both  Puritans  and  Churchmen, 
and  tended  not  a  little  to  confirm  the  growing  jealousy  of 
High  Church  measures. 

The  "king-craft,"  of  which  James  considered  himself  so 
great  a  master,  was  perpetually  leading  him  astray,  and 
involving  him  in  dangerous  political  errors,  which,  blend- 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBLY.  61 

ing  with  the  religious  stniprgles  that  had  so  long  prevailed, 
both  increased  the  numbcrt;,  and  gave  intensity  to  the  feel- 
ings, of  those  who  regarded  v.^itii  jealousy  the  arbitrary 
measures  of  the  Court.  In  one  of  his  wise  speeches  the 
king  gave  a  large  explanation  of  his  views  witli  regard  to 
Puritanism  ;  from  which  it  appeared,  that  he  considered 
all  to  be  l^uritans  who  dared  to  oppose  his  absolute  prero- 
gative, and  to  maintain  the  rights  and  liberties  established 
by  law.*  At  the  same  time,  he  discountenanced  that  sys- 
tem of  theology  generally  termed  Calvinism,  though  he 
had  previously  professed  to  hold  it,  and  had  sent  divines  to 
the  Synod  of  Dort,  where  the  opposite  system,  Arminian- 
ism,  was  condemned.  But  perceiving  th-at  the  Puritans 
were  Calvinists,  he  turned  the  sunshine  of  his  favor 
towards  those  of  the  clergy  who  had  begun  to  support 
Arminian  tenets.  In  this  manner  he  most  unwisely 
brought  about  a  combination  of  two  false  and  dangerous 
principles  on  the  one  side,  and  of  two  true  and  salutary 
principles  on  the  other  ; — the  combination  of  despotism  in 
the  State  and  unsound  theology  in  the  Church,  against  the 
combination  of  political  liberty  and  religious  purity.  The 
alliances  formed  on  both  sides  were  natural,  for  there  is  a 
strong  and  essential  relationship  between  the  component 
elements  of  each  ;  and  yet  this  very  combination  was  the 
cause  of  many  peculiarities  in  the  struggle  which  after- 
wards arose,  and  of  the  various  aspects  which  it  wore  as 
the  one  or  the  other,  political  or  religious,  obtained  the 
ascendency. 

The  combination  thus  begun  in  theory,  was  soon  forced 
into  actual  existence,  when,  in  1620,  the  king,  offended 
with  the  Parliament  for  mentioning  the  subject  of  griev- 
ances, instead  of  bestowing  money,  commanded  them  to 
forbear  intermeddling  with  his  government ;  and  upon  their 
recording  in  their  journals  a  remonstrance  and  protesta- 
tion in  defence  of  their  ancient  and  undoubted  rights  and 
privileges,  he,  in  a  storm  of  fury,  tore  out  the  protestation 
with  his  own  hand,  dissolved  the  Parliament,  and  issued  a 
proclamation  forbidding  his  subjects  to  talk  of  State 
affairs. f  This  was  despotism  undisguised,  and  the  heart 
of  England  understood  and  felt  it.  The  element  of  resist- 
ance to  political  tyranny  began  to  work  in  the  minds  of 
•  Rapin,  vol.  ii.  pp.  192,  193.  f  Rapin,  vol.  ii.  p.  212. 

6 


62  HISTORY    OF    THE 

men,  many  of  whom  had  but  little  reofarded  the  sufferings 
of  the  Puritans  under  an  equal  tyranny  of  an  ecclesiastical 
kind.  But  the  storm  was  delayed,  partly  by  the  natural 
timidity  of  James,  who  was  incapable  of  boldly  executing 
what  he  tyrannically  conceived,  and  partly  also  in  conse- 
quence of  his  death,  and  the  pause  v\hich  naturally  ensued 
at  the  commencement  of  a  new  reign,  till  its  principle* 
should  be  ascertained. 

[1625.]  Charles  I.,  at  his  ascension  to  the  throne  in  16*25, 
found  the  kingdom  in  a  truly  deplorable  condition — on  the 
point  of  being  convulsed  with  internal  dissension,  despised 
by  foreign  countries,  and  its  treasury  totally  exhausted. 
It  would  have  required  a  wise  and  prudent  king,  and  sage 
and  able  counsellors,  to  have  rescued  the  nation  from  such 
imminent  and  formidable  perils.  But  Charles  was  narrow- 
minded  and  obstinate,  impatient  of  advice  except  when  it 
coincided  with  his  own  notions,  bigoted  in  religious  mat- 
ters, entertaining  the  most  despotic  ideas  of  his  royal  pre- 
rogative, and  so  full  of  dissimulation,  that  neither  his  word 
nor  the  most  solemn  treaties  could  bind  him,  as  subsequent 
events  amply  proved ;  and  his  most  trusted  counsellors 
were  his  father's  recent  courtier-race  of  sycophants  and 
oppressors.  His  marriage  to  Henrietta,  daughter  of  the 
French  king,  and  a  zealous  Papist,  caused  an  additional 
ground  of  jealousy  lest  persons  of  that  religious  persua- 
sion should  obtain  undue  and  pernicious  influence ;  and 
many  events  tended  to  strengthen  that  apprehension.  In- 
stead of  relaxing  the  severe  and  persecuting  measures 
under  which  the  Puritans  had  so  long  groaned,  Charles, 
instigated  by  Laud,  Bishop  of  London,  afterwards  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury,  continued  to  oppress  that  body  of 
excellent  men  with  increasing  severity. 

A  contest  arose  between  Charles  and  his  first  Parliament, 
chiefly  on  account  of  their  remonstrances  respecting  the 
dangerous  increase  of  Popery,  and  their  determination  to 
proceed  with  the  impeachment  of  his  favorite,  the  profli- 
gate Duke  of  Buckingham.  To  stop  these  measures,  the 
king  suddenly  dissolved  the  Parliament ;  and  as  he  had  not 
obtained  the  supplies  which  he  desired,  he  proceeded  to 
raise  money  by  forced  loans,  ship-money,  and  other  arbi- 
trary and  illegal  exactions.*  These  violent  encroachmetits 
•  Rushworth,  vol.  i.  p.  192 ;  Whitelocke,  p.  2. 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBLY.  63 

upon  liberty  and  property  increased  the  spirit  of  disafTec* 
tion  which  was  already  strong,  compelling  all  who  valued 
freedom  to  perceive  that  some  decided  stand  must  be  made, 
unless  they  were  prepared  to  sink  into  the  degradation  of 
utter  slavery 

[1628.]  During  the  interval  which  elapsed  before  the 
calling  of  the  next  Parliament,  the  clergy  were  employed 
to  inculcate  with  all  possible  earnestness  the  doctrines  of 
passive  obedience  and  non-resistance,  and  to  prove  tiiatthe 
absolute  submission  of  subjects  to  the  royal  will  and  plea- 
sure, was  authoritatively  taught  in  the  Holy  Scriptures. 
Eagerly  did  the  courtly  divines  comply  with  these  directions, 
vieing  with  each  other  who  should  most  strenuously  pro- 
mote the  cause  of  despotism.  In  this  glorious  strife  Sibthorp 
and  Manwaring  were  peculiarly  distinguished,  broadly  as- 
serting that  the  king  is  not  bound  to  observe  the  laws  of  the 
realm — that  the  authority  of  Parliament  is  not  necessary 
for  the  imposing  of  taxes — and  that  those  who  refuse  obe- 
dience transgress  the  laws  of  God,  insult  the  king's  su- 
preme authority,  and  are  guilty  of  impiety,  disloyalty,  and 
rebellion.  When  the  Parliament  again  met  in  1628,  they 
proceeded  against  Manwaring  for  inculcating  tenets  de- 
structive of  the  laws  and  liberties  of  the  kingdom,  and  sen- 
tenced him  to  fine  and  imprisonment  till  he  should  make 
his  submission.  He  submitted  accordingly  ;  but  the  king 
soon  afterwards  rewarded  his  services  in  the  cause  of  ty- 
ranny, by  raising  him  first  to  a  deanery,  and  subsequently 
to  the  bishopric  of  St.  David's.  The  other  advocates  of 
passive  obedience  also  received  promotion  ;  and  the  nation 
was  constrained  to  perceive  what  were  the  principles  by 
which  the  king  intended  to  govern.  The  controversy  be- 
tw^een  High  Churchmen  and  Puritans,  which  had  so  long 
divided  the  kingdom,  was  thus  forced  to  assume  the  cha- 
racter of  one  in  defence  of  civil  liberty.  For  it  was  clearly 
seen,  that  the  High  Church  party,  who  had  all  along  en- 
joyed exclusively  the  favor  of  the  reigning  monarch,  were 
willing  to  procure  and  perpetuate  that  favor  by  supporting 
the  royal  prerogative  in  its  most  arbitrary  pretensions, 
sacrificing  without  scruple  equally  the  rights  of  conscience 
and  the  civil  liberties  of  the  kingdom. 

The  contest  continued  in  both  its  converging  lines.  On 
the  one  hand  the  king  strove  to  obtain  supplies  without 


64  HISTORy    OF    THE 

redressing  grievances,  employing  already  that  dissimula* 
tion  which  afterwards  caused  his  ruin,  and  assenting  to  a 
bill,  or  petition  of  right,  the  provisions  of  which  he  never 
fulfilled.  On  the  other.  Laud,  who,  on  the  death  of  Buck- 
ingham, obtained  an  undivided  ascendency  over  Charles, 
prohibited  doctrinal  controversy  respecting  the  Arminian 
tenets,  and  commanded  the  suppression  of  afternoon  lec- 
tures, which  were  generally  conducted  by  those  Puritan 
divines  who  could  not  conform  to  the  reading  of  the  Liturgy 
in  the  forenoon  service.  This  cunning  prelate  was  well 
aware,  that  controversy  on  important  doctrinal  subjects 
cultivates  the  power  of  thought,  and  that  lecturing  cuhi- 
vates  knowledge  ;  he  knew  also,  that  men  who  have  been 
trained  to  think,  and  whose  minds  have  acquired  a  store 
of  sound  religious  knowledge,  are  incapable  of  becoming 
the  slaves  of  either  tyranny  or  superstition.  And  as  the 
full  development  of  his  measures  required  the  people  of 
Eno-landto  become  superstitions  slaves,  it  was  necessary  to 
suppress  everything  which  had  a  counteracting  tendency. 
The  same  sort  of  instinctive  perception  of  the  readiest 
method  of  promoting  mental  and  moral  degradation  led 
Laud  to  persuade  the  king  to  revive  the  Book  of  Sports. 
This  was  accordingly  done  in  the  year  1633,  in  the  name 
of  that  sovereign  whom  the  Church  of  England  still  delights 
to  style  "  The  Martyr,"  though  it  would  not  be  easy  to 
tell  of  what  cause  he  was  the  martyr,  unless  it  Avas  of  pre'atic 
profanity,  superstition,  and  despotism.  It  was  not  over 
one  county  that  the  Book  of  Sports  was  now  to  be  set  up, 
in  opposition  to  the  Word  of  God ;  the  bishops  Avere 
directed  to  enforce  the  publication  of  it  from  the  pulpit 
through  all  the  parish  churches  of  their  respective  dio- 
ceses. This  caused  great  distress  of  mind  to  all  pious 
clergymen.  Some  refused  to  read  it,  and  were  suspended 
in  consequence  ;  others  read  it,  and  immediately  after 
having  done  so,  read  also  the  Fourth  Commandment,  "  Re- 
member the  Sabbath-day  to  keep  it  holy  5"  adding,  "  This 
is  the  law  of  God,  the  other  is  the  injunction  of  man." 
And  notwithstanding  the  employment  of  both  power  and 
guile,  the  people  generally  refused  to  turn  God's  appointed 
times  of  holy  rest  into  periods  of  heathen  saturnalia. 

In   the   meantime,    the    tide    of  political    conflict    wa? 
advancing  broad  and  deep.     And  as  it  had  been  caused  at 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBLY.  65 

first  by  the  course  of  persecution  on  account  of  relig^ion, 
when  the  Parliament  souerht  from  time  to  time  to  inter- 
pose in  behalf  of  the  suffering  Puritans,  it  continued  to 
retain  its  religious  character.  Very  strong  and  earnest 
language  was  used  by  several  of  the  leading  members  of 
the  House  of  Commons,  condemning  equally  the  Armininn 
doctrines  and  the  tyrannical  proceedings  of  the  Prelatic 
party  ;  and  with  similar  directness  and  energy  did  they  assail 
the  illegal  methods  adopted  by  the  king  to  raise  money, 
and  the  oppres-ive  conduct  of  the  persons  employed  in 
that  service.  The  king  finding  the  Commons  determined 
to  defend  their  religious  and  civil  liberties,  and  to  refuse 
subsidies  till  the  grievances  of  which  they  complained 
should  be  redressed,  sent  them  orders  to  adjourn.  This 
arbitrary  command  they  refused  to  obey,  till  they  should 
have  prepared  a  remonstrance  against  the  levying  of  ton- 
nage and  poundage,  and  accordingly  proceeded  to  frame 
their  remonstrance  and  protestation.  This  document 
declared,  in  substance,  that  whosoever  should  introduce  in- 
novations in  religion,  or  advise  taking  of  tonnnge  and  pound- 
age not  yet  granted  by  Parliament,  or  submit  to  such  ille- 
gal impositions,  should  be  held  as  betrayers  of,  and  enemies 
to,  the  liberties  of  England.*  The  speaker  refused  to  put 
these  propositions  to  the  vote,  and  attempted  to  leave  tlie 
chair;  but  he  was  forced  back  to  it,  and  held  there  till  they 
were  read  and  carried  by  acclamation.  The  Commons  then 
adjourned;  and  four  of  the  leadinfj  members,  Eliot,  Hollis, 
Valentine,  and  Cariton,  were  committted  to  the  Tower, 
where  Eliot  was  detained  till  he  died,  the  others  being 
released  upon  payment  of  heavy  fines.  Charles  having 
now  learned  that  the  Parliament  would  not  submit  to  be 
made  a  passive  instrument  in  his  hands  to  accomplish  what 
he  might  please,  determined  to  assume  the  whole  powers 
of  the  Legislature,  disregarding  the  form,  as  well  as  vio- 
lating the  spirit  of  the  constitution,  and  realizing  the  abso- 
lute despotism  so  fervently  advocated  by  his  sycophantic 
clergv.  He  ventured  even  to  avow  his  desperate  intention 
by  a  proclamation,  in  which  he  forbade  the  very  mention 
of  another  Parliament.  He  had  yet  to  learn,  that  to  shut 
up  a  strong  feeling  in   the  heart,  is  to   increase   its  sup« 

*  Rushworthj  vol.  i.  p.  659,  et  sea, 
6* 


66  HISTORY    OF    THE 

pressed  strength,  and  to  give   it  entire  postsession  of  the 
inner  being. 

As  if  for  the  very  purpose  of  imparting  additional  inten- 
sity to  the  growing  indignation  of  the  kingdom,  Laud,  now 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  proceeded  with  equal  eager- 
ness in  imposing  fresh  ceremonies  of  the  most  absurd  cha- 
racter upon  the  Church,  and  in  the  infliction  of  excessive 
cruelties  upon  the  Puritans.  These  popish  ceremonies 
drove  numbers  into  non-conformity  ;  and  the  barbarities 
perpetrated  upon  those  who  dared  to  complain  or  to  refuse 
compliance,  provoked  the  nation  almost  beyond  endurance. 
Alexander  Leighton  was  condemned  to  have  his  ears  cut 
ofl^,  and  his  nose  slit,  to  be  branded  on  the  cheek,  to  stand 
in  that  condition  on  the  pillory,  and  then  to  be  cast  into 
prison  till  he  should  pay  a  fine  utterly  beyond  his  means, 
— a  sentence  equivalent  to" perpetual  imprisonment.  Bur- 
ton, Bastwick,*  and  Prynne  suffered  similar  cruelties.  And 
great  numbers  were  reduced  to  entire  destitution,  because 
they  dared  to  write  or  speak  against  Laud's  Popish  cere- 
monies, or  against  the  Prelatic  system  of  Church  govern- 
ment. Numbers  forsook  the  country,  and  retired  some  to 
the  Netherlands,  others  to  the  settlements  recently  formed 
in  America.  Never,  probably,  was  there  a  period  in  which 
the  principles  of  religious  and  civil  liberty,  and  the  feelings 
of  human  nature,  were  more  shocked  and  outraged.  But 
a  course  of  crime  is  also  a  course  of  infatuation.  At  the 
very  time  when  the  cruel  tortures  of  these  wronged  and 
oppressed  sufferers  were  av/aking  the  most  intense  sympa- 
thy in  the  nation,  the  king  adopted  a  measure  which  roused 
a  corresponding  degree  of  political  indignation.  Finding 
it  difficult  to  procure  supplies  as  readily  as  his  necessities 
required,  he  devised  the  plan  of  assessing  not  only  the 
maritime  but  also  the  inland  counties  for  sums  of  money, 
for  the  ostensible  purpose  of  building  ships  of  war.  This 
tax,  as  even  Clarendon  admits,  was  intended  not  only  fo? 
the  support  of  the  navy,  but  "  for  a  spring  and  magazine 
that  should  have  no  bottom,  and  for  an  everlasting  supply 
for  all  occasions."  This  was  clearly  perceived,  and  imme- 
diately opposed  by  the  bold  and  wise  assertors  of  national 
liberty.     The  celebrated  Hampden  refused  to  pay  his  share 

•  In  passing  sentence  on  Bastwick,  the  bishops  denied  that  they  held 
their  jurisdiction  from  the  king. — Whitelocke,  p.  22. 


wkstmi\stf:r  asseimf.ly.  67 

of  the  tax,  and  determined  to  bring  the  legality  of  levying 
such  an  impost  to  a  public  trial.  About  the  close  of  the 
year  1639,  the  cause  was  tried  before  the  twelve  judges  in 
the  Exchequer  Chamber.  The  judges  hesitated.  They 
perceived  clearly  that  the  law  was  in  favor  of  Hampden  ;  but 
they  held  their  situations  during  the  royal  pleasure,  and 
seven  decided  that  the  fax  was  legal,  while  one  doubted,  and 
four  condemned  it.*  His  majesty  gained  the  decision  ;  but 
Hampden  and  freedom  gained  the  cause,  in  the  strong  feel- 
ing which  w^as  roused  throughout  the  entire  kingdom. 

Another  act  of  infatuation  speedily  followed.  For  a  time 
the  suffering  Puritans  alone  had  sought  refuge  from  oppres- 
sion in  a  voluntary  exile  ;  but  now  the  defenders  of  civil 
liberty  began  to  adopt  the  same  course.  At  length  even 
Hampden,  and  his  cousin,  Oliver  Cromwell,  discouraged 
with  their  long  and  hitherto  fruitless  struggle,  resolved  also 
to  seek  in  the  New  VN'orld  that  liberty  which  seemed  to 
have  forsaken  its  ancient  English  home.f  But  an  order  was 
published,  forbidding  any  to  leave  the  kingdom  without  per- 
mission from  the  privy  council.  They  remained,  returned 
to  the  field  of  danger  and  of  duty,  and  resumed  a  contest 
which  presented  now"  no  medium  between  complete  freedom 
and  absolute  slavery, — no  retreat,  no  cessation,  no  alterna- 
tive but  victory  or  death.  Thus  by  this  act  of  despotic 
infatuation,  Charles  gave  to  his  most  formidable  antagonists 
the  terrible  energies  of  desperate  necessity,  and  sealed  his 
own  dark  and  hapless  doom. 

There  was  still  another  element  introduced  about  this 
time,  as  if  to  render  the  dreadful  combination  perfect  for 
evil.  Although  Laud  did  not  attempt  to  deny  the  king's 
supremacy  in  all  matters  ecclesiastical,  yet  the  principle 
first  promulgated  by  Bancroft — the  divine  authority  of  the 
Episcopal  order  —had  taken  possession  of  his  narrow  and 
restless  mind,  and  impelled  him  to  endeavor  partially  to 
realize  it,  though  its  full  and  ultimate  bearing  lay  far  beyond 
his  reach  even  to  imagine.  He  not  only  drew  the  half  of 
the  chancery  business  into  the  hands  of  persons  nominated 
to  their  offices  by  the  prelates,  but  also  prevailed  upon  the 
king  to  allow  the  bishops  to  hold  their  ecclesiastical  courts 
in  their  own  names,  and  by  their  own  seals,  without  the 
king's  letters  patent  under  the  Great  Seal.  This  was  a 
•  Whiielock,  p.  24.  f  Neal,  vol.  i.  p.  618. 


68  HISTOKY    OF    TKK 

direct  infringement  of  the  royal  prerogative  ;  and  to  this  he 
succeeded  in  adding  another  as  glaring,  namely,  the  power 
of  tke  bishops  to  frame  new  articles  of  visitation,  without 
the  king's  authority,  and  to  administer  an  oath  of  inquiry 
concerning  them.*  In  this  manner  the  prelates  became  pos- 
sessed of  extensive  jurisdiction,  both  civil  and  ecclesiasti- 
cal, not  only  independent  of  crown  and  parliament,  but 
based  upon  the  assumption  of  a  divine  right,  which  rendered 
them  entirely  irresponsible,  and  beyond  the  control  of  hu- 
man law.  Had  not  the  spirit  of  liberty,  civil  and  religious, 
been  at  that  time  vigilant  and  strong,  these  prelatic  usur- 
pations must  have  soon  reduced  England  to  a  state  of  the 
most  abject  slavery.  And  although  the  fearful  recoil 
caused  the  death  of  both  the  wily  prelate  and  the  milled 
king,  it  is  greatly  to  be  feared  that  the  Laudean  principle 
is  not  yet  dead,  though  it  has  long  been  dormant  — that  it 
may  yet  av«^ake  in  portentous  strength, — and  that  it  may  put 
forth  a  power,  and  give  rise  to  a  struggle,  of  tremendous 
magnitude,  before  it  be  itself  destroyed. 

At  length  the  king  reached  the  turning  point  of  his  wild 
and  reckless  course.  Instigated  by  his  evil  genius,  Laud, 
he  strove  to  impose  upon  the  Presbyterian  Church  and 
people  of  Scotland  the  whole  mass  of  prelatic  rites  and 
ceremonies,  for  the  sake  of  which  he  had  already  driven 
England  to  the  extreme  point  of  endurance.  But  that 
point  had  been  long  previously  reached  in  Scotland,  and 
the  attempt  provoked  an  instantaneous  and  determined 
resistance.  A  large  portion  of  the  nobility,  nearly  all  the 
middle  classes,  the  whole  of  the  ministers,  and  almost  the 
entire  body  of  the  people,  united  in  a  solemn  national 
covenant  in  defence  of  their  religious  liberties,  resolved  to 
peril  life,  and  all  that  life  holds  dearest,  rather  than  sub- 
mit to  the  threatened  violation  of  conscience.  The  king 
raised  an  army  to  subdue  them  by  force,  but  shrunk  from 
the  perilous  encounter,  and  framed  an  evasive  truce.  This 
abortive  attempt  exhausted  his  treasury,  and  compelled 
him  reluctantly  to  call  a  Parliament,  from  which  he  hoped 
to  procure  supplies.  The  Parliament  met  on  the  13th  of 
April,  1640,  after  an  interval  of  twelve  years ;  but  the  spi- 
rit of  liberty  w^as  now  stronger  in  the  bosom  of  its  members 
than  it  had  formerly  been,  and  still  less  disposed  to  pros- 
*  Neal,  vol.  i.  pp.  584,  585. 


\Vi:S'IiVlL\STEIl    ASSEMULY.  69 

trale  itself  before  the  royal  prerop^ative.  His  nr.ajesty  de- 
manded supplies,  and  promised  then  to  grant  time  to  take 
their  grrievances  into  consideration.  The  Commons  began 
with  applying  for  the  redress  of  grievances,  and  refused  to 
proceed  with  the  grant  of  a  subsidy  till  these  should  be 
redressed.  L  isappointed  and  enraged,  the  king  dissolved 
the  Parliament  and  threw  the  leading  members  into  prison. 
But  as  his  need  of  money  was  urgent,  he  commenced  ex- 
acting it  more  oppressively  than  ever,  by  forced  loans,  by 
siiip-money,  by  granting  monopolies,  and  by  every  artilice 
vvhich  want  could  suggest,  and  tyranny  employ.  And,  as 
if  conscious  that  Episcopac}'^  was  the  cause  of  the  sove- 
reign's distress,  the  Convocation  which  met  at  the  same 
time,  continued  sitting  after  the  dissolution  of  the  Parliament, 
contrary  to  law  and  custom,  and  granted  a  considerable 
sum  of  money  to  his  majesty,  to  enable  him  to  prosecute 
the  "Episcopal  war."  This  appeared  a  dangerous  prece- 
dent, fraught  with  peril  to  the  liberties  of  the  kingdom, 
since,  on  the  one  hand,  the  king  could  augment  the  reve- 
nues of  the  clergy,  and  on  the  other,  they  could  replenish 
his  coffers,  be  his  purposes  what  they  might,  without  legis- 
lative authority,  and  thereby  give  him  the  means  of  com- 
pleting his  despotic  encroachments.  Seventeen  canons 
were  also  published  by  this  Convocation,  in  the  sixth  of 
udiich  all  clergymen  are  required  to  take  an  oath,  express- 
ing approbation  of  the  doctrine,  discipline,  and  government 
of  the  Church  of  England,  one  clause  of  v\^hich  says,  "Nor 
will  I  ever  give  my  consent  to  alter  the  government  of  this 
Church,  by  archbishops,  bishops,  deans,  archdeacons,  &c., 
as  it  stands  now  established.^'*  From  this  clause  it  ob- 
tained the  name  of  '•'■the  et  cetera  oath^^''  and  became  an  ad- 
ditional element  of  strife  between  the  Prelatists  and  the 
Puritans,  driving  many  ministers  into  the  latter  body,  be- 
cause they  could  not  consent  to  swear  adherence  to  they 
knew  not  what. 

Charles  having  again  obtained  a  sufficient  si;m  of  money 
to  enable  him  to  maintain  an  army,  broke  ofl'  all  pacihc 
relations  with  his  Scottish  subjects,  and  marched  north- 
wards to  subdue  them  by  force.  But  they  were  not  un- 
prepared for  such  an  event.  The  long  course  of  intri* 
guing  dissimulation  which  they  had  detected  and  baffled, 
•  Neal,  vol.  i.  p.  630. 


70  niSTOKY    OF    THE 

during  the  previous  stages  of  their  transactions  with  his 
majesty,  had  led  them  to  the  conclusion,  that  he  would 
observe  the  terms  of  the  most  solemn  treaty  no  longer 
than  till  he  could  violate  them  with  safety.  They  had 
therefore  retained  their  military  officers  in  pay,  and  wert 
in  a  condition  to  raise  an  army  at  a  moment's  notice. 
There  had  been  also  begun  a  private  correspondence  be- 
tween them  and  the  leading  English  patriots  ;  and  they 
had  received  assurance,  that  if  they  should  advance  into 
England  itself,  they  would  be  welcomed  as  deliverers. 
They  accordingly  crossed  the  border,  defeated  a  strong 
party  which  opposed  their  passage  of  the  Tyne  at  New- 
burn,  took  possession  of  Newcastle,  and  advanced  into 
England.  Alarmed  with  their  progress,  and  finding  it  im- 
possible to  raise  and  maintain  a  sufficient  force  to  resist 
them,  in  the  disaffected  state  of  his  English  subjects,  the 
king  appointed  commissioners  to  treat  with  the  Scots  at 
Ripon.  This  led  to  a  cessation  of  hostilities  for  two 
months,  commencing  October  the  26th,  during  which  the 
Scottish  army  were  to  be  maintained  at  his  majesty's  ex 
pense  ;  the  remaining  negotiations  for  peace  were  trans 
ferred  from  Ripon  to  London. 

It  had  again  become  necessary  to  call  a  Parliament,  for 
the  adjustment  of  the  important  matters  in  dispute  ;  and 
great  exertions  were  made  on  both  sides  in  the  election  of 
members.  But  the  heart  of  England  was  now  fairly 
warmed,  and  its  strong  spirit  roused.  By  far  the  majority 
of  the  elections  were  decided  in  favor  of  the  defenders  of 
liberty  ;  and  as  all  knew  that  the  crisis  had  come,  all  were 
thoroughly  prepared  for  the  struggle.  In  that  Parliament 
was  collected  not  only  the  flower  of  living  Englishmen, 
but  it  may  be  fearlessly  said,  that  no  age  or  nation  has 
ever  produced  men  of  greater  eminence,  in  abilities  and 
character,  than  were  the  leaders  of  that  celebrated  assem- 
bly.  To  mention  the  names  of  Pym,  Hampden,  Cromwell, 
Selden,  is  to  mention  men  of  almost  unequalled  distinc- 
tion, in  sagacity,  patriotism,  strength  of  mind,  and  extent 
of  learning  ;  and  those  who  held  but  a  secondary  position, 
were,  nevertheless,  men  who  w^ere  possessed  of  talents 
and  energy  enough  to  have  earned  high  renown  in  any 
period  less  prodigal  of  human  pov/er.  Such  was  that 
House  of  Commons,  afterwards  so  famous  under  the  name 
of  the  Long  Parliament. 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBLY.  71 

Scarcely  had  this  Parliament  met,  on  the  3d  of  No /em- 
ber, 164-0  when  ample  proof  was  given  that  its  members 
were  fully  aware  of  the  great  task  they  had  to  perform. 
They  appointed  four  committees  to  conduct  with  rapidity 
the  important  matters  before  them, — for  religious  grievan- 
ces,— for  the  affairs  of  Scotland  and  Ireland, — for  civil 
grievances, — concerning  Popery  and  Popish  plots.  In 
these  committees  affairs  were  prepared  for  full  discussion 
in  the  House,  so  that  there  might  be  neither  loss  of  time 
nor  mismanagement.*  And  as  religious  grievances  had 
long  been  felt,  and  had  led  to  the  greater  part  of  the  civil 
oppression  which  had  roused  the  kingdom,  the  Parliament 
took  these  immediately  into  consideration.  The  canons 
of  the  late  Convocation  were  declared  to  be  illegal,  and 
not  binding;  and  sharp  animadversions  were  made  res- 
pecting Laud,  as  their  chief  author.  This  led  to  the  fram- 
ing of  an  impeachment  against  him,  as  engaged  in  the 
treasonable  design  of  subverting  the  religion  and  laws  of 
his  country.  The  complaint  of  the  Scottish  commission- 
ers against  Laud,  as  the  real  author  of  all  the  commotions 
which  had  taken  place  in  Scotland,  formed  a  large  and 
heavy  portion  of  the  charge  which  led  to  the  impeachment 
of  the  unfortunate  archbishop.  An  accusation,  consisting 
of  fourteen  articles,  was  drawn  up,  presented  to  the  House 
of  Lords,  and  the  charge  being  sustained,  he  was  commit- 
ted to  the  Tower. 

About  the  same  time,  or  rather  a  few  days  before  it,  the 
Earl  of  Strafford,  Lord  Lieutenant  of  Ireland,  was  also  im- 
peached, and  committed  to  the  Tower.  The  letters  and 
despatches  which  passed  between  Laud  and  Strafford  clear- 
ly prove  that  they  were  the  prime  instigators  of  all  the  ty- 
rannical measures  which  had  characterized  the  government 
of  Charles  for  the  preceding  twelve  years, — at  which  time 
Strafford  (then  Mr.  Wentworth)  deserted  the  patriotic 
party,  and,  like  all  apostates,  became  the  most  bitter  enemy 
of  the  cause  w^hich  he  had  forsaken.  The  very  term  em- 
ployed by  Laud,  as  distinctive  of  himself  and  his  measures 
— ''  Thorough" — shows  clearly  the  character  of  the  keen 
relentless  spirit  and  despotic  temper  which  filled  his  nar- 
row mind.  And  the  haughty,  dark,  and  arrogant  nature  of 
Strafford, —  conscious  of  great  abilities,  full  of  ambitious 
•  Whitelocke,  p.  36. 


72  HISTORY    OF    THE 

designs,  and  utterly  unscrupulous  with  regard  to  the  nnea* 
sares  by  which  they  should  be  carried  into  effect, — ren- 
dered him  in  every  respect  a  dangerous  man,  particularly 
as  the  confidential  adviser  and  favorite  minister  of  a  mo- 
narch who  himself  aimed  at  despotism.  It  was  not  strange, 
that  the  Commons  of  England  thought  it  necessary  to  re- 
move such  men  from  his  majesty's  councils,  as  a  prelimi- 
nary step  towards  the  recovery  of  the  ^nation's  liberties 
The  result  of  these  impeachments  is  Avell  known  ;  but  as 
several  important  transactions  intervened,  these  must  first 
be  narrated. 

Kedress  was  granted  to  several  of  those  who  had  suffered 
under  prelatic  tyranny.  Prynne,  Burton,  and  Bastwick 
were  released  from  their  imprisonment  in  the  Channel 
Islands,  and  conducted  through  London  in  a  sort  of  tri- 
umphal procession.  Alexander  Leighton  was  also  released 
from  prison,  and  appointed  keeper  of  Lambeth  Palace. 
Several  bishops  and  other  clerical  dignitaries  were  accused 
of  illegal  and  oppressive  conduct,  and  felt  some  portion  of 
the  weight  of  retributive  justice.  And  so  strong  was  the 
indignation  which,  long  suppressed,  now  burst  forth  with 
proportionally  greater  vehemence,  that  some  difficulty  was 
experienced  in  restraining  the  people  from  inflicting  upon 
their  oppressors  what  Bacon  terms  "  wild  justice." 

The  flood-gates  were  now  opened,  the  popular  mind  began 
to  rush  forth,  and  it  required  both  great  strength  and  great 
dexterity  to  guide  it  into  a  safe  channel.  It  had  been  part 
of  the  Laudean  policy  to  prevent  all  public  discussion  re- 
*ipecting  the  high  pretensions  of  Prelacy  ;  but  freedom  of 
discussion  was  now  procured,  and  the  press  began  to  pour 
forth  treatises  of  every  kind  and  size,  in  which  not  only 
were  the  abuses  of  Prelacy  fully  stated,  but  also  the  Pre- 
latic form  of  Church  government  itself  was  strenuously 
assailed.  Bishop  Hall  v.Tote  in  defence  of  Episcopacy,  and 
was  answered  by  a  celebrated  treatise,  under  the  title  of 
"  Smectymnuus,"  a  word  formed  from  the  initial  letters  of 
the  names  of  its  authors, — Stephen  Marshall,  Edmund  Ca 
lamy,  Thomas  Young,  Matthew  Newcomen,  and  William 
Spurstowe.  Even  the  mighty  Milton  employed  his  pen  in 
this  keen  literary  warfare  ;  and  it  is  no  rash  matter  to  as- 
sert, that  in  learning,  talent,  genius,  and  strength  of  argu- 
ment, the   Puritan  writers   immeasurably   surpassed   their 


WESTMINSTKK    ASSEMBLY.  73 

antagonists,  and  produced  an  impression  on  the  public  mind 
so  deep  and  strong  that  it  decided  the  controversy,  so  far 
as  Prelatic  Church  government  was  concerned,  even  at  its 
beginning. 

Along  with  the  literary  warfare,  another  method  of  as- 
sault, not  less  formidable,  was  employed.  Petitions  were 
poured  into  the  House  of  Commons  from  every  part  of  the 
country,  signed  by  almost  incredible  numbers,  against  the 
hierarchy  ;  some  desiring  its  reformation,  others  praying 
that  the  whole  system  might  be  destroyed.  Of  the  latter 
kind,  that  which  attracted  chief  attention  was  one  from 
the  city  of  London,  signed  by  about  fifteen  thousand  per- 
sons, and  generally  termed  "  The  Root  and  Branch  Peti- 
tion," on  account  of  an  expression  which  occurs  in  its 
prayer,  viz. :  "That  the  said  government,  with  all  its  de- 
j)endencies,  roots  and  branches,  may  be  abolished."  Counter 
petitions  were  also  brought  forward  in  defence  of  the  hie- 
rarchy, scarcely,  if  at  all,  less  numerous.  Debates  arose 
in  consequence,  and  very  strong  language  was  employed 
by  several  members,  condemnatory  of  the  oppressive  con- 
duct of  the  hierarchy.  Bills  were  also  introduced,  chiefly 
v»^ith  the  view  of  taking  away  legislative  authority  from 
the  bishops,  by  relieving  them  from  the  discharge  of  civil 
duties  in  the  Upper  House  ;  but  the  House  of  Lords  re- 
jected these  measures,  and,  after  a  protracted  struggle, 
there  seemed  to  be  no  prospect  of  getting  that  grievance 
remedied. 

A  difficulty  of  a  legal  nature  occurred  in  the  trial  of 
Strafford.  Although  his  accusation  specified  matters  of 
the  most  arbitrary  and  oppressive  character,  yet  it  was 
not  clear  that  they  fell  within  the  express  terms  of  statute 
definition  of  high  treason.  The  charge  was  therefore  so 
altered  as  to  enable  the  Commons  to  proceed  with  a  bill 
of  attainder,  which  passed  that  House,  and  was  brought  be- 
fore the  Lords.  There  seemed  to  be  great  probability 
that  it  would  be  lost  in  that  House,  when  an  event  occur- 
red which  changed  the  whole  aspect  of  afl^airs,  so  far  as 
that  was  pacific.  A  plot  was  formed  by  some  leading 
officers  in  the  army  and  the  courtiers,  to  bring  the  army 
to  London,  in  order  to  overawe  the  Parliament,  rescue 
Strafford,  and  take  possession  of  the  metropolis.  This 
plot  was  discovered,  traced  out,  publicly  stated  to  Parlia- 
7 


74  HISTORY    OF    THE 

ment  by  Mr.  Pym,  on  the  2d  May,  1641,  and  immediately 
the  conspirators  absconded — some  even  seeking  safety  by 
fleeing  to  France.*  The  effect  was  like  a  lightning-flash 
— sudden  and  fatal.  Jt  revealed  to  the  community  their 
own  peril,  and  the  nature  of  the  meas^ires  which  the  king 
was  capable  of  pursuing  ;  and  thus  it  drove  them  to  the 
conclusion  that  his  word  or  treaty  could  not  be  trusted, 
and  that  the  only  method  of  securing  their  own  safety  con- 
sisted in  depriving  him  of  all  power  to  injure  them.  Nu- 
merous and  tumultuary  mobs  assembled  around  the  Houses 
of  Parliament,  rending  the  air  with  cries  of  "  Justice ! 
Justice  !"  In  this  state  of  public  agitation  the  peers  passed 
the  bill  of  attainder. 

Another  important  measure  passed  at  the  same  perilous 
moment.  The  king  was  anxious  that  the  Scottish  army 
should  return  to  Scotland,  being  well  aware  that  its  pre- 
sence in  England  was  a  source  of  great  strength  to  the  pa- 
triots, paralyzing,  at  the  same  time,  his  own  military  pre- 
parations. He  repeatedly  urged  Parliament  to  relieve  the 
country  from  the  oppressive  burden  of  maintaining  these 
two  armies,  the  Scottish  and  his  own.  The  House  of  Com- 
mons had  already  borrowed  large  sums  for  the  payment  of 
the  current  expenses  ;  and  a  still  larger  sum  would  be  re- 
quired for  the  completion  of  the  transaction.  But  when  the 
plot  against  the  Parliament  was  detected,  the  citizens  of 
London,  who  had  hitherto  advanced  the  necessary  supplies 
on  parliamentary  security,  refused  to  contribute  any  more 
on  a  security  which  appeared  to  be  so  precarious.  Public 
credit  being  thus  overthrown,  the  only  expedient  for  its  re- 
covery which  presented  itself  was,  to  secure  the  continua- 
tion of  the  Parliament  till  these  troubles  should  terminate. 
A  bill  was  framed  for  this  purpose,  enacting,  "  That  this 
present  Parliament  shall  not  be  adjourned,  prorogued,  or 
dissolved,  without  their  own  consent."  This  bill  passed 
both  Houses  with  very  slight  opposition,  and  received  the 
royal  assent  by  commission,  along  with  the  bill  of  attainder 
against  the  Earl  of  Strafford. f  It  would  seem  that  the  de- 
tection of  the  plot  against  the  Parliament  had  completely 
stunned  the  king  and  his  advisers,  so  that,  in  their  guilty 
CQnfusion,  they  were  incapable  of  perceiving  the  vast  im- 

*  Whitelocke,  p.  43.  t  Ibid. 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEMHLV.  75 

port  of  such  a  concession,  which  rendered  the  Parliament 
completely  independent  of,  and  co-ordinate  with,  the  king 
durinof  its  own  pleasure. 

Yet  another  step  was  taken,  of  scarcely  less  importance. 
Mr.  Pym  moved,  that  both  Houses  might  join  in  some  bond 
of  defence,  for  the  security  of  their  liberties  and  of  the  Pro- 
testant religion.  A  protestation  was  accordingly  framed, 
almost  identical  in  principle  with  the  National  Covenant 
of  Scotland,  though  somewhat  different  in  foim,  and  less 
minute  in  detail.* 

The  protestation  was  as  follows  :  — "  I,  A.  B.,  do,  in  the 
presence  of  Almighty  God,  promise,  vow,  and  protest  to 
maintain  and  defend,  as  far  as  lawfully  I  may,  with  my  life, 
power,  and  estate,  the  true  Reformed  Protestant  Religion, 
expressed  in  the  doctrine  of  the  Church  of  England,  against 
all  Popery  and  Popish  innovation  within  this  realm,  con- 
trary to  the  said  doctrine  ;  and  according  to  the  duty  of 
my  allegiance,  1  w^ill  maintain  and  defend  his  majesty's  royal 
person,  honor,  and  estate  :  Also  the  power  and  privileges 
of  Parliament,  the  lawful  rights  and  liberties  of  the  subjects, 
and  every  person  that  shall  make  this  protestation,  in  what- 
soever he  shall  do  in  the  lawful  pursuance  of  the  same  ; 
and  to  my  power,  as  far  as  lawfully  I  may,  I  will  oppose, 
and  by  all  good  ways  and  means  endeavor  to  bring  condign 
punishment  on  all  such  as  shall  by  force,  practice,  counsels, 
plots,  conspiracies,  or  otherwise,  do  anything  to  the  con- 
trary in  the  present  protestation  contained:  And  further, 
that  I  shall,  in  all  just  and  honorable  ways,  endeavor  to 
preserve  the  union  and  peace  betwixt  the  three  kingdoms 
of  England,  Scotland,  and  Ireland  ;  and  neither  for  hope, 
fear,  or  any  other  respects,  shall  relinquish  this  promise, 
vow,  and  protestation." 

This  protestation  w^as  subscribed  by  the  whole  House  of 
Commons  on  the  3d  of  May,  and  next  day  by  all  the  Peers 
present  in  Parliament,  except  two  ;  it  was  then  printed,  and 
sent  to  every  part  of  the  kingdom,  to  be  taken  by  the  whole 
nation  ;  and  when  it  was  opposed,  the  Commons  passed  a 
resolution,  declaring,  "  That  whosoever  would  not  take  the 
protestation  was  unfit  to  bear  office  in  the  Church  or  com- 
monwealth." To  this  course  of  procedure  the  king  offered 
no  opposition  ;  and  let  it  be  observed,  that  the  English 
•  Whitelocke,  p.  43  ;  Rushworth,  vol.  iv.  p.  241. 


76  HISTORY    OF    THE 

House  of  Commons  acted  a  much  more  arbitrary  part,  in 
the  enforcing-  of  this  protestation,  than  had  been  done  in 
Scotland  with  regard  to  the  National  Covenant :  and  as 
this  took  place  more  than  two  full  years  before  the  Solemn 
League  and  Covenant  between  the  two  kingdoms  was  even 
thought  of,  and  was  done  by  a  House  of  Commons  all  no- 
minally Episcopalians,  it  proves  that  it  is  directly  contrary 
to  fact  and  truth,  to  ascribe  the  severe  measures  of  the 
Long  Parliament  to  Presbyterian  intoleraace. 

Events  of  great  moment  nov/  followed  each  other  with 
startling  rapidity.  A  bill  was  passed,  abolishing  the  Court 
of  High  Commission  ;  and  another,  putting  an  end  to  the 
Star-Chamber.  Both  these  bills  were  signed  by  the  king  ; 
and  thus  the  main  engines  of  oppression  were  destroyed. 
Acquiring  fresh  confidence  by  success,  the  House  of  Com- 
mons resumed  their  proceedings  against  the  bishops,  and 
actually  prepared  articles  of  impeachment.  The  king,  per- 
ceiving that  he  was  waging  an  unsuccessful  warfare,  changed 
his  course,  and  suddenly  intimated  to  the  Parliament  that 
he  intended  to  pay  a  visit  to  Scotland,  to  complete  the 
pacification  with  that  country.  The  long-pending  treaty 
was  concluded  and  ratified,  and  his  majesty  journeyed  to 
his  native  country  with  such  expedition  as  to  show  that 
some  important  measures  were  in  his  mind.  The  leading 
parliamentary  politicians  penetrated  his  design, — which 
indeed  was  sufficiently  apparent.  He  had  felt  the  strength 
of  that  support  which  the  presence  in  England  of  the  Scot- 
tish army  gave  to  the  patriotic  party;  and  he  justly  ima- 
gined, that  if  he  could  not  only  detach  the  Scots  from  the 
English  Parliament,  but  gain  them  to  himself,  he  would 
then  be  able  to  reduce  his  refractory  subjects  to  his  own 
terms.  The  king's  absence  necessarily  led  to  the  adjourn- 
ment of  the  Parliament;  but  its  chief  committees  continued 
to  meet,  and  a  small  committee  was  formed  to  accompany 
his  majesty  to  Scotland.*  The  secret  purpose  of  this  com- 
mittee was,  to  give  to  the  leading  Scottish  statesmen  such 
private  information  as  should  put  them  on  their  guard 
against  the  arts  of  royal  dissimulation  ivhich  might  be 
practis^ed.  For  this  the  Scottish  lenders  were  already  pre- 
pared by  their  own  painful  experience,  and  although  the 

*  The  committee  were,  the  Earl  of  Bedford,  Lord  Howard,  Sir  Philip 
Staplcton,  Sir  William  Armyne,  IMr.  Hampden,  and  Mr.  Fiennes. 


WESTMINSTF.R    ASSEMKLY.  T) 

king  exerted  himself  to  tlic  utmost  to  give  satisfaction  to 
them,  and  bestowed  honors  on  the  chief  of  the  Covenan- 
ters,  yet  he  couM  not  remove  their  suspicions,— still  less 
induce  them  to  pledge  themselves  for  the  support  of  his 
intentions. 

Not  only  were  his  majesty's    expectations  disappointed, 
but  additional  cause  was  given  to  his  people  to  watch   all 
his  movements  with  increasing  jealousy.    Before  the  kino-g 
arrival  in  Scotland,  the  Earl  of  Montrose  had  been  detect'ed 
forming  a  conspiracy  to  betray  the  Covenanters,  even  while 
acting  as  one  of  their  commissioners  at  Ripon.     For  this, 
and  other  similar  matters,  he  had  been  imprisoned  in  Edin- 
burgh Castle.     Even  in  his  confinement  he  found  means  of 
corresponding  with  his  associates,  and,  through  them,  with 
the  king;  and  a  plot  was  formed,  of  which  there  is  strong 
•eason  to  believe  the  king  to  have  been  aAvare,  to  seize  Ar- 
gyle  and  Hamilton,  and  either  put  them  to  death,   or  hurry 
them  on  board  a  frigate  which  lay  in  Leith  roads,  and  hav- 
ing thus  struck  terror  into  the  Covenanters,  to  put  the  army 
into  the  hands  of  the  king,  at  the  head  of  which  his  majesty 
might  return  and  overpower  his  refractory  Parliament  in 
England.*     The  discovery  of  this  plot  excited  a  sudden  and 
strong  commotion  ;  but  the  king  endeavored  to  cause  it  to 
be  reo-arded  as  an  entirely  groundless  alarm,  and  redoubled 
his  efforts  to  give  all  possible  ^satisfaction  lo  the  Covenan- 
ters. ^  This  event,  known  by  the  name  of  The  Incident,  sunk 
deep  into  men's  minds,  and  led  them  to  entertain  the  belief 
that  the  king  was   capable   of  conniving   at   any  measure 
however  dark   and  bloody,  provided  that  it  could  promote 
his  progress  towards  absolute  despotism.     The  fearful  out- 
burst  of  Popish  fury,  termed  the  Irish   Massacre,   taking 
place  at  the    same  time,   gave  to   all  these   suspicions  the 
most  dark  and  dreadful  aspect,  and  filled  the  heart  of  both 
England  and  Scotland  with  intense  horror  and  alarm.    And 
although  it  may  be  difficult  to  prove  that  Charles  directly- 
instigated  the  Irish  Papists  to  this   insurrection,  or   antici* 
pnted  the  terrific  deeds  that  were  done,  yet   it  would  be 
still  more    difficult  to  acquit  him   of  knowing   that  it  was 
intended,  and  of  conniving  at  it,  with  the  expectation  of 

♦  Baillie's  Letters,  vol.  i.  p.  392;  Brodie'e  British  Empire,  vol.  iii.  pp 
150-155. 


78  HISTORY    OF    THE 

turning  it  to  his  own  advantage,  by  means  of  the  armed 
forces  which  would  be  placed  under  his  command.* 

Such  was  the  state  of  matters,  and  such  the  agitated 
temper  of  the  kingdom,  when  Charles  returned  to  London, 
again  to  resume  his  contest  with  the  Parliament,  now  roused 
to  a  pitch  of  almost  desperate  determination.  A  commit- 
tee had  been  appointed,  a  considerable  time  before,  "  to 
draw  out  of  cU  the  grievances  of  the  nation  such  a  remon- 
strance as  might  be"  a  faithful  and  lively  representation  to 
his  majesty  of  the  deplorable  state  of  the  kingdom."  This 
remonstrance,  consisting  of  two  hundred  and  six  articles,! 
was  read  in  the  House  of  Commons  on  the  32d  of  No- 
vember, 1641.  It  had  to  encounter  a  very  strong  oppo- 
sition ;  and  after  a  debate  which  lasted  from  three  in  the 
afternoon  till  three  in  the  morning,  it  was  carried  by  a 
majority  of  11,  the  votes  being  159  to  148.  Within  a 
few  days  after  the  remonstrance  had  been  presented  to 
his  majesty,  and  before  he  had  returned  an  answer,  it 
was  printed  and  dispersed  all  over  the  kingdom.  By 
this  step,  certainly  defective  in  courtesy,  the  Parliament 
fairly  took  their  ground,  threw  themselves  and  their 
cause  upon  the  principle  and  intelligence  of  the  king- 
dom, and  thenceforward  the  struggle  was  one  between 
the  sovereign  and  the  nation. 

The  trials  of  the  bishops,  who  had  been  impeached  as 
authors  of  the  nation's  grievances,  came  next.  The  bishops 
attempted  to  stay  the  proceedings  by  entering  a  demurrer. 
Great  and  dangerous  tumults  arose  in  consequence  of  the 
position  taken%y  the  prelates  ;  and  they,  alarmed,  and  con- 
sidering themselves  exposed  to  personal  danger,  determined 
to  abstain  from  going  to  the  House  of  Lords,  and  drew  up  a 
protestation  against  whatsoever  should  be  done  by  Parlia- 
ment in  their  "absence,  as  null,  and  of  no  effect.^  Their 
greatest  enemies  could  not  have  suggested  to  them  a  more 
self-destructive  course.  They  were  immediately  accused 
of  acting  in  a  manner  destructive  of  parliaments,  and 
assuming  a  negative  voice  in  the  Legislature,  possessed  by 

*  The  perusalof  "A  Declaration  of  the  Commons,"  &.C.,  July  25,  1642, 
would  prove  to  any  impartial  reader  that  there  was  such  a  plot  betweeu 
the  queen  and  the  Irish  Papists,  and  that  the  king  knew  of  it. 

t  Rushworlh,  vol.  iv.  pp.  438-451 ;  Whitelock,  p.  49. 

X  Whilelocke,  p.  51. 


WESTMINSTKR    ASSEMBLY.  79 

the  king  alone  ;  and  a  new  impeachment  being  framed  on 
this  ground,  ten  oi"  them  were  sent  to  the  Tower. 

[IG-l-i.]  These  proceedings  exasperated  the  king  to  such 
a  degree,  that  he  immediately  resolved  to  retaliate  ;  and 
sent  the  attorney-general  to  the  House  of  Commons  to 
impeach  of  high  treason  five  of  the  leading  members, 
namely  Lord  Kimbolton,  Sir  Arthur  Hazelrigge,  Denzill 
Hollis,  John  Pym,  John  Hampden,  and  William  Stroud. 
The  Commons  not  having  ordered  them  into  custody,  the 
king  himself  went  to  the  House  next  day  (January  4th)  to 
seize  them,  attended  by  a  crowd  of  armed  men.  They  had 
received  notice  of  his  intention  and  withdrawn,  so  that 
when  he  placed  himself  in  the  speaker's  chair,  and  looked 
around  him,  he  perceived  that  this  violent  and  unconstitu- 
tional attempt  was  abortive.*  The  most  intense  excite- 
nf}ent  arose,  Parliament  adjourned  for  a  week,  the  citizens 
of  London  protected  the  five  members,  and  offered  to  raise 
the  trained  bands  for  the  protection  of  Parliament  itself. 
In  vain  did  the  king  attempt  to  overawe  them  by  fortifying 
Whitehall,  and  placing  artillerymen  in  the  Tower.  They 
were  equally  resolute,  and  prepared  to  bear  back  force  by 
force  if  necessary.  In  this  great  moment,  when  every 
measure  was  surcharged  with  peril,  the  king's  infatuation 
again  prevailed  ;  and  instead  of  remaining  either  to  amend 
his  error,  or  to  confront  the  danger,  he  forsook  Whitehall 
on  the  10th  of  January,  removing  first  to  Hampton  Court, 
then  to  Windsor,  and  soon  afterwards  to  York,  leaving  all 
the  elements  of  strife,  wdiich  his  despotic  proceedings  had 
aroused,  to  combine  and  rush  onward  in  a  torrent  of  irre- 
sistible might. 

Very  soon  after  his  majesty's  departure  from  London, 
the  bill  to  remove  the  bishops  from  the  House  of  Lords,  that 
they  might  "  not  be  entangled  with  secular  jurisdiction," 
was  again  brought  forward,  passed  by  a  large  majority  on 
the  6th  of  February,  and  on  the  lith  of  the  same  month 
obtained  the  royal  signature  by  commission. 

But  the  intentions  of  the  king  soon  began  to  display 
their  hostile  aspect  too  evidently  to  be  any  longer  misun- 
derstood. From  York  he  made  a  rapid  movement  upon 
Hull  at  the  head  of  a  considerable  body  of  cavalry,  on  the 
23d  of  April,  for  the  purpose  of  seizing  upon  that  import 
•  Whitelocke,  p.  50. 


80  HISTORY    OF    THE 

ant  town,  and  taking  possession  of  its  magazines.  Sil 
John  Hotham  refused  to  admit  him  with  more  than  twelve 
attendants,  having  been  appointed  to  his  situation  as 
governor  by  the  Parliament,  to  whom  he  was  responsible 
for  its  custody,  and  the  king,  in  his  disappointment  and 
anger,  declared  him  a  traitor.*^  Several  manifestoes  pass- 
ed between  the  king  and  the  Parliament,  both  on  account 
of  this  event,  and  with  regard  to  the  command  of  the 
militia ;  but  the  progress  of  negotiation,  instead  of  produ- 
cing an  agreement,  rendered  the  breach  wider  and  wider, 
preparatory  for  an  entire  disruption.  Considerable  num- 
bers of  both  Houses  forsook  the  Parliament  and  joined  the 
king  ;  an  army  was  formed,  and  Hull  was  invested  in  regu- 
lar form.  To  meet  this  hostile  movement,  the  two  Houses, 
on  the  12th  of  July,  resolved  that  an  army  should  be  raised 
for  the  defence  of  the  king  and  Parliament,  and  gave  the 
command  to  the  Earl  of  Essex.  On  the  9th  of  August,  the 
king  proclaimed  Essex  and  his  adherents  traitors  ;  and  also 
declared  both  Houses  guilty  of  high  treason,  forbidding  all 
his  subjects  to  yield  obedience  to  them  The  Parliament; 
on  the  other  hand,  proclaimed  all  who  should  join  the 
king's  army  traitors  against  the  Parliament  and  the  king- 
dom. In  another  proclamation,  the  king  summoned  all  his 
faithful  subjects  to  repair  to  him  at  Nottingham,  where,  on 
the  22d  day  of  August,  1642,  he  caused  his  standard  to  be 
erected  in  a  field  adjoining  the  castle  wall.  Few  complied 
with  this  warlike  summons;  but  the  standard  was  erecteJ 
amid  the  gathering  gloom  and  the  rising  gusts  of  a  com- 
mencing tempest,  which,  ere  evening,  increased  to  a  per- 
fect hurricane,  and  dashed  to  the  earth  the  royal  banner,t 
as  if  ominous  of  the  fierce  storm  of  civil  war  then  bursting 
on  the  land,  and  the  disgrace  and  ruin  that  awaited  the 
royal  cause. 

It  had  for  some  time  been  clearly  perceived  by  the  Par- 
liament that  war  was  inevitable,  especially  after  the  king's 
attempt  upon  Hull  ;  and  they  accordingly  began  to  make 
all  necessary  preparations.  The  friendly  countenance  and 
support  of  Scotland  was  of  thq  utmost  importance,  and 
this,  therefore,  they  resolved  fro  secure.  Twice  had  the 
Council  of  Scotland  attempted  to  mediate  between  the 
king  and  the  Parliament,  first  in  the  beginning  of  the  year, 

*  Rushworth,  vol.  iv.  p.  567.  t  Clarendon,  vol.  ii.  p.  720. 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBLY.  81 

aj^d  again  in  May ;  but  though  the  Parliament  accepted 
their  mediation,  it  was  rejected  by  the  king  in  a  percmp 
torj'  tone,  commanding  them  to  be  content  with  their  own 
set'lement,  and  not  to  intermeddle  with  the  affairs  of  an- 
other nation.  The  English  Parliament,  understanding  that 
the  General  Assembly  was  to  meet  at  Edinburgh  about  the 
end  of  July,  addressed  a  letter  to  that  body,  stating  the 
perilous  aspect  of  affairs,  and  expressing  their  desire  to 
avoid  a  civil  war,  and  yet  to  promote  reformation  in  both 
Church  and  State.  The  Assembly's  answer,  dated  3d  Au- 
gust, expresses  sympathy  with  the  sufferings  and  dangers 
of  Enofland,  recommends  unity  of  religion,  "  That  in  all 
his  majesty's  dominions  there  might  be  one  Confession  of 
Faith,  one  Directory  of  Worship,  one  public  Catechism, 
and  one  form  of  Church  government,"  accusing  the  pre- 
latical  hierarchy  of  being  the  great  impediment  against 
obtaining  that  desirable  result.  A  letter  from  a  number 
of  English  divines  was  addressed  to  the  same  Assembly, 
in  which,  after  expressing  gratitude  for  previous  advices, 
they  state,  "  That  the  desire  of  the  most  godly  and  con- 
siderable part  amongst  us  is,  that  the  Presbyterian  govern- 
ment, which  hath  just  and  evident  foundation,  both  in  the 
Word  of  God  and  religious  reason,  may  be  established 
amongst  us,  and  that  (according  to  your  intimation)  we 
may  agree  in  one  Confession  of  Faith,  one  Directory  of 
Worship,  one  public  Catechism  and  form  of  government."* 
From  these  expressions  it  is  evident  that  both  the  Eng- 
lish Parliament  and  the  Puritan  divines  were  perfectly 
aware  of  the  views  entertained  by  the  Scottish  Parliament 
and  Assembly;  and  yet  did  not  hesitate  to  seek  assistance, 
and  to  assent  to  the  idea  of  a  uniformity  in  religious  wor- 
ship, which  Scotland  regarded  as  an  indispensable  condi- 
tion. 

Nor  does  it  appear  that  the  English  Parliament  enter- 
tained any  reluctance  to  procure  Scottish  aid  on  such 
terms.  For,  in  the  month  of  September,  a  bill  was  passed 
through  the  House  of  Commons,  and  on  the  10th  of  that 
month  through  the  House  of  Lords,  entitled  "  An  Act  for 
the  utter  abolishing  and  taking  away  of  all  archbishops, 
bishops,  their  chancellors,  and  commissaries,"  &;c., — -or- 
daining that,  after  the  r)th  of  November,  1613,  there  shall 
•Act  of  Assembly,  1642. 


83  HISTORY    OF    THE 

be  no  archbishop,  &c.,  including  the  whole  array  of  digni- 
taries and  cathedral  functionaries,  and  that  all  their  titles, 
jurisdictions,  and  offices,  "  shall  cease,  determine,  and  be- 
come absolutely  void  ,"  that  their  possessions  should  re- 
turn to  the  king  ;  that  the  property  of  cathedrals  should 
he  vested  in  trustees,  who  should  give  a  stipend  to  their 
late  possessors,  and  out  of  the  remainder  support  preach- 
mg  ministers,  both  in  towns,  and  through  the  country 
where  required.'"^  Thus  was  the  English  hierarchy  over- 
thrown by  a  Parliament  which  even  Clarendon  admits  to 
have  been  composed  of  men  favorably  disposed  to  Epis- 
copacy 5  and  this  overthrow  took  place  at  a  time  when  the 
Parliament  had  not  resolved  to  what  form  of  Church  gov- 
ernment a  legal  ratification  should  be  given,  a  whole  year 
being  allowed  to  elapse  before  the  act  of  abolition  should 
take  effect,  to  allow  ample  time  for  the  deliberations  of  an 
assembly  of  divines  which  they  intended  to  call  together 
for  that  purpose.  And  so  far  was  the  Scottish  General  As- 
sembly from  attempting  to  force  England  to  adopt  the 
Presbyterian  form  of  Church  government,  that  they  ab- 
stained from  framing  a  Confession  of  Faith  and  Directory 
for  themselves,  till  it  should  be  seen  what  England  would 
do,  that  the  matter  might  not  be  foreclosed,  but  the  Church 
of  Scotland  left  at  liberty  to  adopt  the  same  general  sys- 
tem, if  it  should  prove  such  as  to  gain  their  approbation. 
Even  at  an  earlier  period,  in  the  very  commencement  of 
the  negotiations  between  the  English  Parliament  and  the 
Scottish  Church  and  people,  the  latter  had  strongly  advo- 
cated a  uniformity  of  religious  worship  in  the  three  king- 
doms, and  at  the  same  time  had  as  strongly  disclaimed  the 
idea  of  presuming  to  dictate  to  England  in  so  grave  and 
important  a  matter.  Yet  this  accusation  is  constantly 
urged  ngainst  the  Church  of  Scotland  by  her  adversaries, 
in  ignorance,  it  may  be  hoped,  of  the  real  facts  of  the 
case;  although  it  is  not  denied  that  the  Scottish  Church 
naturally  cherished  the  expectation  that  any  thorough  re- 
ligious reform  in  England,  would  produce  a  Church  more 
resembling  the  other  Protestant  Churches  than  it  had  been 
under  its  wealthy  and  political  hierarchy. 

The  sAvord  was  now  unsheathed  :  and  for  a  period  the 
more  harmless  war   of .  negotiations  and  manifestoes  was 
*  Neal,  vol.  ii.  pp.  150,  151. 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBLY.  83 

abandoned,  and  a  sterner  conflict  wacfed.  Several  battles 
were  fousfht,  some  with  doubtful  success,  and  in  others  to 
the  disadvantage  of  the  Parliament.  When  the  approach 
of  winter  led  to  a  partial  cessation  of  hostilities,  proposals 
were  again  made  for  peace,  and  commissioners  were  sent 
from  the  Parliament  to  Oxford  to  endeavor  to  frame  a 
reaty.  The  Scottish  Council  sent  commissioners  also ; 
and  hopes  were  for  some  time  entertained,  that  the  king 
would  consent  to  such  terms  as  might  restore  peace  to  the 
kingdom  without  the  absolute  surrender  of  its  liberties. 
But  it  was  discovered  that  his  majesty  was  busily  engaged 
in  framing  a  double  plot,  one  part  of  which  had  for  its  ob- 
ject the  seizure  of  London  ;  the  other,  that  Montrose 
should  raise  the  Highlands  of  Scotland,  while  the  Irish 
army  should  invade  the  western  parts  of  that  kingdom, 
and  having  subdued  the  Covenanters,  march  to  the  assist- 
ance of  the  king  against  his  English  Parliament.  The 
discovery  of  these  plots,  the  contumelious  treatment  sus- 
tained by  the  Scottish  commissioners,  and  the  manifest  du- 
plicity of  the  king  himself,  caused  the  treaty  to  be  broken 
off,  and  both  parties  prepared  to  resume  the  conflict  in  the 
field.  Again  the  king's  troops  were  repeatedly  success- 
ful, and  the  Parliament  were  constrained  to  make  redou- 
bled exertions  to  maintain  their  ground.  For  the  same  rea- 
son, they  were  the  more  anxious  to  enter  into  a  close 
treaty  with  Scotland,  and  appointed  commissioners  to 
attend  the  Scottish  Convention  of  Estates,  and  General  As- 
sembly, which  were  to  meet  in  the  beginning  of  August, 
1G4  3. 

Before  that  period  the  Parliament  had  been  endea- 
voring to  advance  in  what  they  felt  to  be  of  primary  im- 
portance,—the  reformation  of  religion.  By  the  act  of 
September  10,  1642,  it  had  been  ordained  that  the  prelatic 
form  of  Church  government  should  be  abolished  from  and 
after  the  5th  of  November,  1643  ;  and  it  had  also  been 
determined  that  an  assembly  of  divines  should  be  held,  to 
complete  the  necessary  reformation.  In  the  meantime, 
enactments  were  passed  for  the  better  observance  of  the 
Lord's  Day, — the  suppression  of  the  "Book  of  Sports," — 
the  keeping  of  monthly  fasts  and  lectures, — the  removal 
of  all  superstitious  monuments  and  ornaments  out  of 
churches, — and  for  the  trial  of   scandalous  and  inefficient 


84  HISTORY  OF  THE 

ministers,  as  well  as  for  granting  some  support  to  those  of 
the  Puritan  ministers  who  had  been  ejected  in  former  times 
for  non-conformity,  or  had  recently  suffered  from  the  rav- 
ages of  the  king's  army.  One  of  the  articles  in  the  grand 
remonstrance  of  December,  16'il,had  expressed  the  desire 
of  the  Parliament  that  there  might  be  "a  general  synod  of 
the  most  grave,  pious,  learned,  and  judicious  divines  of 
this  island,  assisted  with  some  from  foreign  parts  profess- 
ing the  same  religion  with  us,  who  may  consider  of  all 
things  necessary  for  the  peace  and  good  government  of  the 
Church  ;  and  to  represent  the  result  of  their  consultations, 
to  be  allowed  and  confirmed,  and  to  receive  the  stamp  of 
authority.*'  During  the  treaty  of  Oxford  a  bill  of  the 
same  purport  was  presented,  and  rejected  by  his  majesty. 
And  when  at  length  convinced  that  the  king  would  make 
no  concessions  in  behalf  of  civil  and  relifrious  liberty,  the 
Parliament  resolved  that  they  would  delay  no  longer,  but 
turn  the  bill  into  an  ordinance,  and  convene  the  Assembly 
by  their  own  authority.  This  important  ordinance  is 
dated  June  12,  1643,  and  is  as  follows  : — 

"  An  Ordinance  of  the  Lords  and  Commons  in  Parliament,  for  the  calling 
of  an  Assembly  of  learned  and  godly  Divines,  and  otliers,  to  be  con- 
sulted with  by  tlie  Parliament,  for  the  settling  of  the  Government  and 
Liturgy  of  the  Church  of  England,  and  for  vindicating  and  clearing  of 
the  Doctrine  of  the  said  Church  from  false  aspersions  and  interpreta- 
tions. 

«  Whereas,  amongst  the  infinite  blessings  of  Almighty  God  upon  this 
nation,  none  is,  or  can  be,  more  dear  unto  us  than  the  purity  of  our  re- 
ligion; and  for  that  as  yet  many  things  remain  in  the  Liturgy,  disci- 
pline, and  government  of  the  Church  which  do  necessarily  require  a  fur- 
ther and  more  perfect  reformation  than  yet  hath  been  attained  :  And 
whereas  it  hath  been  declared  and  resolved  by  the  Lords  an-d  Commons 
assembled  in  Parliament,  that  the  present  Church  government,  by  arch- 
bishops, bishops,  their  chancellors,  commissaries,  deans,  deans  and 
chapters,  archdeacons,  and  other  ecclesiastical  officers,  depending  upon 
the  hierarchy,  is  evil,  and  justly  offensive  and  burdensome  to  the  king- 
dorq,  a  great  impediment  to  reformation  and  growth  of  religion,  and  very 
prejudicial  to  the  state  and  government  of  this  kingdom  ;  and  that  there- 
fore they  are  resolved  that  the  same  shall  be  taken  away,  and  that  such 
a  government  shall  be  settled  in  the  Church  as  may  be  most  agreeable 
to  God?s  Holy  Word,  and  most  apt  to  procure  and  preserve  the  peace  o." 
the  Church  at  home,  and  nearer  agreement  with  the  Church  of  Scotland 
and  other  reformed  Churches  abroad  :  And  for  the  better  effecting  here- 
of, and  for  the  vindicating  and  clearing  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Church 
of  England  from  all  false  calumnies  and  aspersions,  it  is  thought  fit  and 
necessary  to  call  an  Assembly  of  learned,  godly,  and  judicious  divines, 


WESTMINSTER  ASSEMBLY.  85 

to  consult  and  advise  of  such  matters  and  things,  touching  the  premises, 
as  shall  be  proposed  unto  them  by  both  or  either  of  the  Houses  of  Par- 
liament, and  to  give  their  advice  and  counsel  therein  to  both  or  either 
ot"  the  said  Houses,  when,  and  as  often  asj  they  shall  be  thereunto 
required  : 

'-  Be  it  therefore  ordained,  by  the  Lords  and  Commons  in  this  present 
Parliament  assembled,  that  all  and  every  the  persons  hereafter  in  this 
rdinance  named,  that  is  to  say,"  [Here  follow  the  names],  "and  such 
ther  persons  as  shall  be  nominated  and  appointed  by  both  Houses  of 
Parliament,  or  as  many  of  them  as  shall  not  be  letted  by  sickness,  or 
other  necessary  impediment,  shall  meet  and  assemble,  and  are  hereby 
required  and  enjoined,  upon  summons  signed  by  the  clerks  of  both 
Houses  of  Parliament,  left  at  their  several  respective  dwellings,  to  meet 
and  assemble  at  Westminster,  in  the  chapel  called  King  Henry  the 
Seventh's  Chapel,  on  the  lirst  day  of  July,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord  one 
thousand  six  hundred  and  forty-three;  and  after  the  lirst  meeting,  being 
at  least  of  the  number  of  forty,  shall  from  time  to  lime  sit,  and  be  re- 
moved from  place  to  place ;  and  also,  that  the  said  Assembly  shall  be 
dissolved  in  such  manner  as  by  both  Houses  of  Parliament  shall  be  di- 
rected. And  the  said  persons,  or  so  many  of  them  as  shall  be  so  assem- 
bled or  sit,  shall  have  power  and  authority,  and  are  hereby  likewise 
enjoined  from  time  to  time  during  this  present  Parliament,  or  until  fur- 
ther order  be  taken  by  both  the  said  Houses,  to  confer  and  treat  among 
themselves  of  such  matters  and  things  touching  and  concerning  the 
Liturgy,  discipline  and  government  of  the  Church  of  England,  or  the 
vindicating  and  clearing  of  the  doctrine  of  the  same  from  all  false  as- 
persions and  misconstructions,  as  shall  be  proposed  to  them  by  both  or 
either  of  the  said  Houses  of  Parliament,  and  no  other,  and  to  deliver 
their  opinions  and  advices  of  or  touching  the  matters  aforesaid,  as  shall 
be  most  agreeable  to  the  Word  of  God,  to  both  or  either  of  the  said 
Houses,  from  time  to  time,  in  such  manner  and  sort  as  by  both  or  either 
of  the  said  Houses  of  Parliament  shall  be  required,  and  the  same  not  to 
divulge  by  printing,  writing,  or  otherwise,  without  the  consent  of  both 
or  either  House  of  Parliament. 

"  And  be  it  further  ordained,  by  the  authority  aforesaid,  that  William 
Twisse,  Doctor  in  Divinity,  shall  sit  in  the  chair,  as  prolocutor  of  the 
said  Assembly ;  and  if  he  happen  to  die,  or  be  letted  by  sickness,  or 
other  necessary  impediment,  then  such  other  person  to  be  appointed  in 
his  place  as  shall  be  agreed  on  by  both  the  said  Houses  of  Parliament. 
And  in  case  any  difference  of  opinion  shall  happen  amongst  the  said 
persons  so  assembled,  touching  any  of  the  matters  that  shall  be  proposed 
to  them,  as  aforesaid,  that  then  they  shall  represent  the  same,  tos;et^er 
with  the  reasons  thereof,  to  both  or  either  the  said  Houses  respectively, 
to  the  end  such  further  direction  may  be  given  therein  as  shall  be  re- 
quisite in  that  behalf  And  be  it  further  ordained,  by  the  authority 
aforesaid,  that  for  the  charges  and  expense  of  the  said  divines,  and  every 
oi  them,  in  attending  the  said  service,  there  shall  be  allowed  unto  every 
of  them  that  shall  so  attend  the  sum  of  four  shillings  for  every  day,  at 
the  charges  of  the  C(;mmo  i  wealth,  at  such  time,  and  in  such  manner, 
as  by  both  Houses  of  Parliament  shall  be  appointed.  And  be  it  further 
ordained,  that  all  and  every  the  said  divines,  so  as  aforesaid  required 
and  enjoined  to  meet  and  assemble,  shall  be  Ireed  and  acquitted  of  and 
8 


86  HISTORY  OF  THE 

from  every  offence,  forfeiture,  penalty,  loss,  or  damage,  which  shall  ol 
may  arise  or  grow  by  reason  of  any  non-residence  or  absence  of  them, 
or  any  of  them,  from  his  or  their,  or  any  of  their,  church,  churches,  or 
cures,  for  or  in  respect  of  the  said  attendance  upon  the  said  service,  any 
law  or  statute  of  non-residence,  or  other  law  or  statute  enjoining  their 
attendance  upon  their  respective  ministries  or  charges  to  the  contrary 
thereof  notwithstanding.  And  if  any  of  the  persons  before  named  shall 
happen  to  die  before  the  said  Assembly  shall  be  dissolved  by  order  of 
both  Houses  of  Parliament,  then  such  other  person  or  persons  shall  be 
nominated  and  placed  in  the  room  and  stead  of  such  person  and  persons 
so  dying,  as  by  both  the  said  Houses  shall  be  thought  fit  and  agreed 
upon  :  And  every  such  peison  or  persons  so  to  be  named,  shall  have  the 
like  power  and  authority,  freedom  and  acquittal,  to  all  intents  and  pur- 
poses, and  also  all  such  wages  and  allowances  for  the  said  service, 
during  the  time  of  his  or  their  attendance,  as  to  any  other  of  the  said 
persons  in  this  ordinance  named,  is  by  this  ordinance  limited  and  ap- 
pointed. Provided  always,  that  this  ordinance,  or  anything  therein 
contained,  shall  not  give  unto  the  persons  aforesaid,  or  any  of  them,  nor 
shall  they  in  this  Assembly  as-sume  to  exercise  any  jurisdiction,  power, 
or  authority  ecclesiastical  whatsoever,  or  any  other  power,  than  is  herein 
particularly  expressed.*'* 

Such  was  the  ordinance  callhig  together  the  famous 
Westminster  Assembly  of  Divines;  and  while  that  ordi- 
nance is  immediately  before  the  reader,  it  may  be  expe- 
dient to  direct  his  attention  to  some  of  its  peculiarities. 
About  nine  months  had  elapsed  since  the  passing  of  the 
bill  for  abolishing  the  hierarchical  form  of  Church  govern- 
ment, during  all  of  which  period  there  w^as  no  form  of 
Church  government  in  England  at  all.  It  was  impossible, 
therefore,  that  the  Assembly  could  meet  in  any  ordinary 
form,  either  as  a  Convocation,  according  to  the  Prelatic 
system  ;  or  by  the  votes  of  the  ministers,  according  to  the 
Presbyterian  system;  but  it  was  of  necessity  called  by  the 
Parliament,  who  nominated  all  the  members  themselves, 
for  the  purpose  of  obtaining  their  advice  respecting  the 
further  reformation  which  should  take  place,  and  the  or- 
ganized form  which  should  be  assumed,  by  the  Church  of 
England.  For  though  the  Prelatic  system  had  been 
abolished,  yet  the  Parliament  did  not  imagine  that  the 
Church  had  therefore  ceased  to  exist,  as  the  language  of 
the  ordinance  proves.  Let  it  be  observed  also,  that  one 
object  in  view  by  the  Parliament  in  calling  this  Assembly, 
was  for  the  express  purpose  of  procuring  a  "  nearer  agree* 
ment  with  the  Church  of  Scotland,  and  other  reformed 
Churches  abroad  ;"  so  that,  as  there  were  no  other  kinds 
•  Rushworth,  vol.  v.  pp.  337-339. 


WESTMINSTER  ASSEMBLY.  87 

of  national  Churches  but  the  Episcopalian  and  the  Presby- 
terian, it  must  have  been  the  intention  of  the  Encrlish  Par- 
liannent  to  bring-  their  Church  nearer  to  the  Presbyterian 
system,  if  not  to  adopt  that  system   entirely.     It  is  there 
fore  equally  calumnious  and  absurd  to  accuse  the  Church 
of  Scotland  of  attempting-  to  constrain  the  English  Parlia- 
ment in  its  intended  ecclesiastical  reform,  for  the  purpose 
of  getting  the  Presbyterian   polity   introduced.     The  Par- 
liament had  to  choose — to  retain  the  Prelatic  system,  with 
all  the  tyranny  and  oppression  which  had  become  absolute- 
ly intolerable — to  adopt  the  Presbyterian,  to  which  the  Pu- 
ritan ministers  were    already  predisposed — or  to  have  no 
national  Church  at  all,  with  the  imminent  peril  of  national 
anarchy.     And  let  this  also  be  observed,  that  the  long   in- 
termixture of  civil  and  ecclesiastical  jurisdictions  in  Eng- 
land, while  it  had  given  to  the  Parliament  a  very  just  dread 
of  permitting  ecclesiastical  persons  to  possess  civil  juris- 
diction, had  both  familiarized  them  with  the  idea,  contained 
in  the  sovereign's   ecclesiastical  supremacy,  of  a  blended 
jurisdiction,  and  had  driven   him  to   entertain  the  convic- 
tion that  civil  rulers  ought  to  rule  in  ecclesiastical  causes 
equally  as  in  their  own  peculiar  province.     Even  the  fact 
that  there  was  at  the  time  no  legal  form  of  Church  gov- 
ernment in  the  kingdom,  and  that  consequently  there  could 
be  no  assembly  of  divines  without  being  called  by  Parlia- 
ment, led  to  the  infusion  of  an  Erastian  taint  into  the  very 
calling  together  of  that  Assembly,  and  the  framing  of  the 
regulations  limiting  and  directing  its  deliberations. 

Having  now  arrived  at  the  actual  calling  of  the  West- 
minster  Assembly  of  Divines,  it  may  be  expedient,  before 
proceeding  to  relate  its  deliberations,  to  give  a  very  brief 
outline  of  the  leading  topics  contained  in  the  history  and 
character  of  the  Church  of  Scotland,  so  far  as  it  is  neces- 
sary that  these  should  be  known,  in  order  to  obtain  a  full 
understanding  of  the  subject. 

The  Reformation  in  Scotland  began  and  was  carried  on 
in  a  manner  the  direct  reverse  of  that  which  took  place  in 
England.  In  the  latter  country  it  began  in  royal  caprice 
Of  passion, — was  at  the  first  rendered  subservient  to  the 
arbitrary  will  of  a  despotic  monarch,  through  the  perni- 
cious    element    of    his    ecclesiastical    supremacy, — was 


88  HISTORY  OF  THE 

checked  and  turned  awry  by  that  element,  and  in  the 
struggle  between  those  who  wished  a  further  and  more 
complete  reformation  and  the  courtly  and  prelatic  rulers 
of  the  Church,  it  ended  in  a  civil  and  religious  despotism 
too  heavy  and  cruel  to  be  any  longer  endured.  In  Scot- 
land it  was  entirely  an  ecclesiastical  movement  from  the 
very  beginning.  Patrick  Hamilton,  the  noble  and  youthful 
friend  of  Luther  and  Melancthon,  learned  the  doctrines  of 
the  reformed  faith,  and  taught  them  to  his  countrymen,  till 
his  testimony  was  sealed  with  the  blood  of  martyr- 
dom. Wishart  gave  an  additional  impulse  to  the  sacred 
cause,  equally  by  his  teaching  and  his  death.  Several  of 
the  Popish  priesthood  were  converted,  and  aided  in  con- 
verting others.  John  Knox  caught  up  the  same  testimony  ; 
and  though  by  the  commanding  power  of  his  genius,  and 
the  unconquerable  energy  of  his  character,  he  caused  the 
voice  of  religious  reformation  to  be  heard  throughout  the 
kingdom  equally  by  prince  and  peasant,  in  the  palace  and 
the  cottage,  still  it  was  simply  and  essentially  a  religious 
re  ormation,  taking  its  form  and  impress  directly  from  the 
Word  of  God  alone,  and  encountering  at  every  step  the 
formidable  opposition  of  civil  powers  and  political  intrigues, 
instead  of  receiving  from  them  its  bias  and  its  external 
aspect.  Believing  that  God's  Word  contained  the  only 
authoritative  direction  for  doing  God's  work,  the  Scottish 
reformers  made  their  sole  appeal  "  to  the  law  and  to  the 
testimony;"  and  though  they  respected  the  great  conti- 
nental reformers,  they  sought  the  principles  of  doctrine, 
discipline  and  Church  government,  from  no  foreign  model, 
but  from  the  Holy  Scriptures  alone.  Thus  it  was  that  the 
Church  of  Scotland  framed  its  Confession  of  Faith  and 
its  First  Book  of  Discipline,  and  met  in  its  first  General  As- 
sembly for  its  own  government,  seven  years  before  it  had 
even  received  the  sanction  of  the  Legislature.  Its  first 
General  Assembly  was  held  in  1560,— the  first  act  of  Par- 
liament recognizing  it  as  the  National  Church  was  passed 
in  1567.  From  its  origin  it  had  to  encounter  the  world's 
opposition  ;  in  its  growth  it  received  little  or  nothing  of  a 
worldly  intermixture  ;  and  when  it  reached  somewhat  cf 
matured  form,  it  still  stood  opposed  to  the  world's  cor- 
rupting influence. 

But  a  few  years  elapsed  till  the  rapacity  and  the  over 


WESTMINSTER  ASSEMBLY.  83 

bearing  force  of  the  nobility   began  to   pillage   and  assai* 
the  Scottish  Church  ;  and   where   direct   power  could  not 
prevail,  fraud  and  dissimulation  were  employed.     The  first 
attempt  against  the  free  Presbyterian  Church  of  Scotland, 
was  that  of  Regent  Morton,  w4io  devised  the   well  known 
scheme    of  tulchan   bishops,  that  by  their  instrumentality 
he  might  at  once  seize  its  revenues,  and  corrupt  its  courts. 
When   King  James   assumed   the  reins  of  government  he 
followed   a  similar   course,  with  less   energy,  but  greater 
cunning,  and  w^ith  unwearied  pertinacity.     His  theory  of 
government  was  absolute  despotism;  and  he  had  sagacity 
enough  to  perceive,  that  where  the  civil  and  ecclesiastical 
jurisdictions  were  distinct,  his  theory   could  not  possibly 
be  realized.     And  as  the  Church   of  Scotland  Avas  equally 
opposed  to  either   aspect   of  his  theory,  refusing  to  inter- 
meddle with   civil   affairs  herself,  and  refusing  to  permit 
civil  rulers  to  intermeddle  with  matters  of  a  spiritual  cha- 
racter, the  wily  tyrant  saw  the  necessity  of  subverting  the 
Presbyterian  form    of  Church   government,  and  establish- 
ing prelacy  in  its  stead  ;  well  aware  that  he  would  easily 
acquire   an   influence   over  titled   and  wealthy   clergy   at 
Court,  which   he   could  never  obtain   over  a  free  General 
Assembly.     But  neither  force  nor  treachery  could  succeed 
till  after  he  ascended  the  English  throne,  when,  by  means 
of  the   combined  power   of   English  wealth  and   English 
influence,  he  so  far  changed  the  government   of  the  Scot- 
tish Church  as  to  procure  the  appointment  of  bishops,  the 
half  submission  to  certain  rights  and  ceremonies,  and  the 
partial    suppression   of  General   Assemblies.     Still   a  con- 
siderable portion   of  the  nobility,   the   greater  part  of  the 
ministers,  and  by  far  the  majority  of  the  people,  remained 
Presbyterians  in  principl  ,  and  bore  an  insurmountable  dis- 
like to  Prelacy.     James  had  foresight  enough  to  see  that 
it  would  be  hazardous  to  proceed  further  ;  and  refused  to 
comply  with  the  solicitations   of  Laud,  who  was   eager  to 
impose  the  whole  of  his  beloved  Episcopalian  forms  on  the 
Church  of  Scotland. 

When  Charles  I.  ascended  the  throne  he  found  England 
in  a  state  of  discontent  swelling  towards  insurrection,  in 
consequence  of  the  long  course  of  tyranny,  civil  and  reli- 
gious, which  it  had  uneasily  endured  Unfortunately  for 
him  and  for  the  kingdom,  he  had  imbibed  all  his  father's 
8* 


90 


HISTORY    OF    THE 


despotic  notions  of  the  absolute  and  irresponsible  nature 
of  the  royal  prerogative  5  and  to  little  less  than  his  father's 
dissimulation  and  insincerity,  he  added  far  greater  strength 
of  mind,  and  strength,  or  rather  obstinacy  of  purpose. 
Yielding  himself  entirely  to  the  counsels  of  Laud,  and  of 
his  beautiful  but  imperious  and  relentless  queen,  he  not 
only  refused  to  mitigate  the  sufferings  of  the  English  Puri- 
tans, but  resolved  to  complete  what  his  father  had  begun, 
and  to  bring  the  Scottish  Church  into  an  entire  conformity 
with  that  of  England.  A  Book  of  Canons,  and  a  Liturgy, 
were  framed  by  the  Scottish  bishops,  chiefly  by  Maxwell, 
bishop  of  Eoss,  revised  by  Laud,  and  sent  to  Scotland  to 
be  at  once  adopted  and  used  without  even  the  formality  of 
having  them  laid  before  any  Scottish  civil  or  ecclesiastical 
court.  The  free  spirit  of  Scotland  was  roused  by  this 
mingled  insult  and  tyranny.  At  first  a  sudden  tumult 
broke  out,  and  rendered  the  scheme  abortive  ;  and  then 
followed  a  wide,  deep,  and  steady  determination  to  wrench 
asunder  the  despotic  yoke  of  Prelacy,  and  to  restore  to 
Scotland,  in  all  its  original  purity  and  freedom,  her  own 
dearly  purchased  and  beloved  Presbyterian  Church.  Pledg- 
ing themselves  in  a  sacred  National  Covenant,  the  noblest, 
the  wisest,  and  the  best  of  Scotland's  sons  and  daughters 
prepared  to  encounter  every  peril,  and  to  sacrifice  all  that 
life  holds  dear,  rather  than  yield  up  their  most  precious 
birthright  and  inheritance — their  religious  liberty.  Pro- 
voked to  see  so  bold  and  firm  a  front  of  resistance  shown 
to  his  despotic  designs  in  the  poorest  and  least  populous 
part  of  his  dominions,  Charles  raised  an  army  and  marched 
against  his  hitherto  unconquered  Scottish  subjects.  He 
was  met  on  the  border  by  an  equal  array  of  that  high- 
hearted and  intelligent  class  of  men,  the  Scottish  peasantry, 
who  have  no  parallel  in  any  land,  trained  as  they  are  from 
infancy  to  know,  to  love,  and  to  fear  God,  and  fearing 
Him,  to  have  no  other  fear.  The  king  could,  in  bitterness, 
mock  their  poverty,  but  he  shrunk  from  the  encounter  with 
men  who  knew  better  how  to  die  in  what  they  believed  to 
be  the  cause  of  sacred  truth  and  liberty,  than  how  to  yield 
He  framed  an  evasive  peace,  and  returned  to  England,  pur- 
posing to  conciliate  the  Parliament  so  far  that  he  might 
obtain  the  means  of  overwhelming  Scotland  by  a  new  army 
too  mighty  for  that  small  kingdom  to  resist. 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBLY.  91 

But  the  Enjrlish  Parliament  had,  with  deep  interest, 
marked  tiie  power  of  high  principles  in  the  triumph  of  the 
Scottish  people  ;  ind  refused  to  gratily  their  despotic 
sovereign,  perceiving  well  that  the  overthrow  of  that  free 
country  would  be  speedily  followed  by  the  loss  of  their 
own  remaining  liberties.  A  secret,  but  a  constant  inter- 
course, was  begun  and  carried  on  between  the  English 
Parliament  and  the  Scottish  Covenanters,  for  their  mutual 
support  in  defending  their  civil  and  religious  liberties 
against  the  aggressions  of  the  king.  And  when  Charles 
again  raised  an  army  for  the  prosecution  of  the  helium 
Episcopah^  the  "  Episcopalian  war,"  the  Scottish  Covenant- 
ers no  longer  acted  only  on  the  defensive,  but  boldly  entered 
England,  declaring,  at  the  same  time,  their  pacific  inten- 
tions, their  friendship  towards  England,  their  loyalty  to 
the  king,  and  their  desire  only  to  procure  the  removal  from 
his  majesty's  councils  of  those  jiersons  who  were  plotting 
the  overthrow  of  religious  and  civil  liberty  in  both  coun- 
tries. Charles  again  was  constrained  to  recoil  from  their 
firm  front,  and  to  recommence  a  treaty  of  pacification,  first 
at  Kipon,  and  then  at  London.  The  Scottish  commission- 
ers experienced  the  most  friendly  treatment  in  London, 
and  the  preaching  of  the  ministers,  w^ho  were  empowered 
to  treat  for  the  Church,  while  in  the  metropolis,  attracted 
crow^ds,  and  appears  to  have  produced  a  deep  and  favorable 
impression  respecting  both  themselves  and  their  cause,  as 
even  the  bitter  and  contumelious  language  of  Clarendon 
sufficiently  proves. 

The  king  perceiving  that  the  presence  of  the  Scottish 
commissioners  in  London  tended  to  conlirm  their  intimacy 
and  influence  with  the  Parliament,  at  length  hastily  con- 
cluded the  treaty  of  pacification,  and  set  out  for  Scotland, 
with  the  avowed  intention  of  completely  terminating  all 
the  necessary  transactions  with  the  civil  and  ecclesiastical 
authorities  of  that  kingdom;  but,  as  afterw^ards  appeared, 
with  the  deep  design  of  maturing  the  embryo  plots  of  Scot- 
tish conspirators,  and  the  intended  insurrection  of  the 
Irish  Papists.  The  intrigues  of  Montrose,  the  dark  event 
termed  "The  Incident,"  the  sudden  outburst  of  the  Irish 
Massacre,  and  the  king's  attempt,  after  his  return,  to  seize 
the  five  members  of  the  English  i^ariiament,  have  all  been 
already  related  briefly,  and   need  not  be  here  retraced. 


&2  HISTORY  OF  THE 

Suffice  it  to  say,  that  while  considered  separately,  they 
were  sufficiently  startling,  when  viewed  in  the  light  of  the 
king's  previous  conduct,  and  as  they  occurred  in  the  order 
of  time,  they  gave  to  all  who  valued  religious  and  civil 
liberty,  in  both  England  and  Scotland,  a  fearful  impression 
of  the  terrible  deeds  which  the  king  could  do  or  sanction 
for  the  recovery  of  his  shaken  power,  and  the  establishing 
of  his  desired  absolute  despotism.  They. saw  with  deep 
regret,  that  they  had  to  deal  with  a  sovereign  who  regarded 
treaties  but  as  a  species  of  diplomatic  warfare,  in  which 
parties  strive  to  overreach  each  other,  and  by  whom  the 
mos-t  solemn  stipulations  would  be  observed  no  longer 
than  till  his  safety  would  permit,  or  his  interest  induce 
him  to  break  them.  It  became,  therefore,  imperatively 
necessary  for  the  English  Parliament  and  the  Scottish 
Covenanters,  that  is,  the  Scottish  nation,  to  enter  into  some 
common  bond  of  union  by  means  of  which  they  might  pre- 
vent the  danger  of  being  deceived,  divided,  and  over- 
powered by  their  unscrupulous  antagonist,  and  both  coun- 
tries reduced  to  slavery  and  degradation. 

In  devising  this  common  bond,  there  was  some  difference 
of  opinion  between  the  English  Parliament  and  the  Scottish 
Covenanters,  though  a  diflerence  rather  of  accident  than 
of  essence,  arising  out  of  the  different  points  of  view  from 
which  they  contemplated  the  common  object.  In  Eng- 
land, the  long  course  of  oppression  pursued  by  Elizabeth, 
James,  and  Charles,  fell  chiefly  on  the  Puritans,  who  never, 
at  any  time,  had  formed  a  majority  in  the  nation  ;  and  it 
was  not  till  spiritual  despotism  began  to  produce  civil 
tyranny,  as  it  always  does,  that  England  fairly  awoke.  For 
that  reason  the  main  aspect  of  the  struggle  in  England 
was  one  in  behalf  of  civil  liberty  ;  and,  consequently,  what 
they  chiefly  wished  to  form  with  Scotland  was  a  civil 
league.  On  the  other  hand,  the  contest  had  from  the  first, 
in  Scotland,  been  of  a  religious  character,  the  king  attempt- 
ing to  overthrow  the  religious  liberties  of  the  vast  majori- 
ty, and  to  place  a  religious  despotism  in  the  hands  of  a 
very  small  minority.  And  although  civil  liberty  was  alsc 
assailed  inevitably,  yet  the  primary  and  main  object  of  at 
tack  was  religion ;  so  that  when  the  people  of  Scotland 
united  to  defend  their  sacred  rights  and  privileges,  their 
bond  was    almost  entirely  of   a  religious  character   as  is 


WESTMINSTER    ASSKMBLY.  93 

proved  from  the  tenor  of  the  National  Covenant.  And  as 
it  had  been  by  means  of  English  influence  that  the  Church 
of  Scotland  had  been  overpowered,  the  statesmen  and  di- 
vines of  Scotland  were  fully  convinced  that  they  could 
not  safely  enter  into  any  close  alliance  with  England,  nnless 
their  great  enemy  Prelacy  were  first  abolished,  and  that  no 
secure  and  lasting  intimacy  could  be  maintained  between 
the  two  countries  if  there  were  not  at  least  a  close  approx- 
imation towards  uniformity  in  religious  worship,  disci- 
pline, and  government.  This  idea  the  Scottish  commis- 
sioners strenuously,  yet  most  delicately,  pressed  upon  the 
notice  of  the  English  Parliament  so  early  as  the  beginnino- 
of  the  year  lt)4.1  ;  and  in  this  they  were  supported  by  near- 
ly all  the  Puritan  ministers,  those  only  excepted  who  had 
adopted  the  congregational  system.  What  Scotland  chiefly 
wished,  therefore,  was  to  enter  into  a  religions  covenant 
with  the  English  Parliament.  This,  then,  was  the  differ- 
ence produced  by  these  different  circumstances.  England 
wished  for  a  civil  league  with  Scotland  for  the  perservation 
of  their  mutual  civil  liberties,  but  was  willing  that  it  should 
have  also  a  religious  aspect  and  influence.  Scotland  de- 
sired a  religious  covenant  for  the  preservation  of  their  mu- 
tual religious  liberties,  but  was  willing  that  it  should  have 
also  a  civil  aspect  and  influence.  And  neither  country 
wished  to  dictate  to  the  other  in  either  subject,  but  to 
leave  national  inclinations  and  peculiarities  untouched.  It 
is  evident,  that  in  these  circumstances  a  union  could  be 
formed  ;  but  it  is  as  evident,  that  in  directness  and  sacred- 
ness  of  purpose,  the  superiority  was  on  the  side  of  Scot- 
land, and  also,  that  hers  must  be  the  greatest  danger,  fronn 
the  certainty  that  thus  leagued  together  she  must  share 
the  fortunes  of  her  mightier  neighbor. 

If  the  reader  has  at  all  attended  to  the  facts  stated,  an.d 
the  principles  evolved  in  the  preceding  introductory  pages, 
he  must  have  perceived  their  extreme  importance  in  them- 
selves, and  also  the  light  which  they  throw  on  the  subject 
to  which  he  is  now  to  direct  his  concentrated  attention. 
In  the  earliest  ages  of  Christianity,  the  civil  power  every- 
where was  hostile,  because  it  was  pagan,  that  is,  idolatrous. 
When  the  civil  power  became  avowedly  Christian,  it  did 
so  at  a  time  when  all  the  principles  of  Popery  were  already 
in  existence,  and  wanted   but  a   favorable   opportunity  for 


94*  HISTORY  OF  THE 

obtaining  ascendency.  This  opportnnity  was  furnished  by 
the  ignorance  of  the  barbarian  overthrowers  of  the  Roman 
empire  ;  and  thus  Popery  arose  into  full  power  One  of  its 
distinctive  features  was  its  assumption  of  supremacy  in  all 
matters  both  civil  and  ecclesiastical.  The  fatal  eflect  of 
this  blending  of  jurisdictions  was  not  at  once  apparent  ; 
but  it  led  to  absolute  despotism  and  its  counterpart,  abso- 
lute slavery.  At  the  Reformation,  an  attempt  -was  gene- 
rally made  to  separate  the  two  jurisdictions,  the  civil  and 
the  ecclesiastical ;  but  the  importance  of  the  idea  was  not 
fully  appreciated,  and  the  attempt  was  but  partially  suc- 
cessful. 

In  England,  in  particular,  the  sovereign,  seizing  upon 
the  power  formerly  possessed  by  the  pope,  assumed  both 
jurisdictions,  and  became  head  of  the  Church  as  well  as 
head  of  the  State.  The  pernicious  consequences  were 
soon  apparent, — in  the  unsteady  and  fluctuating  progress 
of  religious  reformation, — in  the  new  forms  of  persecution, 
— in  the  complete  stop  put  to  further  advancement  in  purity 
and  truth, — and  in  the  rapid  growth  of  despotism,  civil 
and  religious. 

These  consequences  advanced  steadily,  though  with 
varying  rapidity,  during  the  reigns  of  Elizabeth,  James,  and 
Charles  1.,  till  they  produced^the  absolute  necessity  of 
resistance,  unless  men  were  willing  to  submit  to  the  entire 
loss  of  natural,  national,  and  religious  liberty.  For  though 
we  have  but  touched  the  main  points  of  the  events  of 
those  reigns,  it  must  be  evident  to  every  intelligent  per- 
son, that  there  was  not  a  single  thing  in  which  a  human 
being  could  claim  liberty  to  act,  as  a  man,  as  a  responsible 
and  free  agent,  and  as  a  member  of  the  Christian  Church, 
which  was  not  directly  and  violently  assailed  by  the  pre- 
lates under  the  authority  of  the  sovereign's  ecclesiastical 
supremacy.  And  as  man  can  never  be  entitled  to  denude 
himself,  or  to  sufl^er  others  to  wrest  from  him  his  essential 
characteristics  of  a  responsible  and  religious  being,  it  had 
become  a  sacred  duty  to  assert  and  defend  his  natural, 
national,  and  religious  rights  and  responsibilities. 

Further,  when  Prelacy,  at  first  avowedly  a  human  inven- 
tion, arrogated  a  divine  right,  it  assumed  an  aspect  that 
could  no  longer  be  endured.  Men  may,  in  certain  circum- 
stances, abstain  from   asserting  their  natural  rights ;  but 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBLY.  95 

when  an  attempt  is  made  to  abolish  these  rights,  even  in 
God's  name,  it  becomes  a  duty  which  they  owe  to  God 
himself,  to  prevent  the  perpetration  of  a  grievous  wrong, 
so  wrought,  as  to  involve  a  violation  of  His  glorious  and 
lioly  character  and  attributes.  It  was,  therefore,  a  holy 
dred  to  resist  that  form  of  prelatic  tyranny  ;  for  it  was  a 
vindication  of  the  King  Eternal  from  a  despotism  usurped 
as  if  by  his  authority. 

And  let  it  be  well  observed,  that  the  awfully  pernicious 
character  here  ascribed  to  the  assumed  divine  right  of  Pre- 
lacy, cannot  be  charged  against  Presbytery,  when  it,  too, 
claims  to  be  of  divine  right.  Because,  while  it  asserts  that 
Christ,  the  only  Supreme  Head  and  King  of  the  Church, 
has  appointed  a  government  and  office-bearers  in  his  spi- 
ritual kingdom,  it  recognizes  equally  the  religious  rights 
and  responsibilities  of  the  people,  the  free  subjects  of  ^hat 
kingdom,  whose  right  to  liberty  of  conscience  is  also  a 
divine  right.  Nor  can  it  ever  become  a  Popery,  by  usurp- 
ing civil  authority,  and  exercising  a  spiritual  and  civil  des- 
potism ;  because  it  owns  and  teaches  the  divine  right  of 
the  civil  magistrate  in  his  own  department,  as  also  and 
equally  an  ordinance  of  God.  But  upon  this  subject  it  is 
needless  to  dwell  at  present ;  it  will  come  more  fully  before 
us  as  we  proceed  in  tracing  the  discussions  of  the  West- 
minster Assembly. 


CHAPTER    II. 

First  Meeting  of  the  Assembly  of  Divines  at  Westminster— List  of  Names 
—Regulations— Order  of  Procedure— A  Fast- The  Thirty-Nine  Arti- 
cles Revised— Commissioners  sent  to  the  Scottish  Convention  of  Estates 
and  General  Assembly — Discussions  concerning  a  Treaty  between  the 
Kingdoms— The  Solemn  League  and  Covenant  prepared  and  as- 
sented to— Taken  in  England  and  in  Scotland— Remarks— Parties 
composing  the  Westminster  Assembly— Episcopalians — Puritans  or 
English  Presbyterians — Independents  or  Congregationalists— Charac- 
ters of  the  Leaders  of  iTiat  Party— Erastians— The  leading  supporters 
of  that  Party— The  Scottish  Commissioners — Their  Characters — Sec- 
tarians throughout  the  Country— Cause  of  so  many  Sects— Prelatic 
Tyranny  and  Neglect  of  Instruction— Connection  and  intercourse  be- 
tween the  Sectarians  and  the  Independents  in  the  Assembly— The 
misapplication  of  the  term  Toleration — Remarks. 

The  ordinance  of  the  Parliament  calling  the  Assembly  of 
Divines  to  meet  at  Westmmster,  on  the  1st  day  of  July, 
1643,  was  issued,  as  has  been  stated,  on  the  12th  of  June, 
in  the  same  year.  On  the  22d  of  June,  his  majesty,  by  a 
proclamation,  forbade  their  m.eeting  for  the  purposes  men- 
tioned in  the  parliamentary  ordinance ;  declared  that  no 
acts  done  by  them  ought  to  be  received  by  his  subjects  ; 
and  threatened,  that  if  they  should  meet,  he  would  proceed 
against  them  wi'th  the  utmost  severity  of  the  law.  This 
was  so  far  unpropitious,  even  to  his  own  cause,  as  it  tended 
to  prevent  the  greater  part  of  the  Episcopalian  divines  who 
had  been  summoned,  from  attending.  The  Scottish  Con- 
vention of  Estates  met  in  June,  but  came  to  no  definite  re 
solution ;  and  public  matters  were  postponed  till  it  should 
be  more  clearly  known  what  terms  would  be  proposed  by 
the  King  and  the  Parliament,  the  Covenanters  being  un- 
willing directly  to  interpose,  if  that  could  be  avoided. 

The  following  is  the  list  of  names  contained  in  the  ordi- 
nance by  which  the  Assembly  was  called  ;  amounting  to 
one  hundred  and  fifty-one   in  all,  namely,  ten  Lords  and 


A\'ESTMIKSTE[1    ASSEMBLY. 


97 


twenty   Commoners,  as  lay    assessors,  and    one  hundred 
and  twenty-one  Divines  : — 


LORDS. 


Alffprnon,  Earl  of  Northumberland 

William,  EarlofBeilford 

riiiliji,  Earl  of  Femliroke  and  Montgomery 

William,  Earl  of  Salisbury 

Henry,  Earl  of  Holland 


Edward,  Earl  of  Manchester 
William,  Viscount  Say  and  Sele 
Edward,  Viscotint  Conway 
Philip,  Lord  Wharton 
Edward,  Lord  Howard  of  Escrick 


COMMONERS. 


John  Sdden,  Esq. 

Francis  Rouse,  Esq 

Edmund  Prideaux,  Esq. 

Sir  Henry  Vane,  Senior 

John  Glynn,  Esq.,  Recorder  of  London 

John  Whyte,  Esq. 

Bulstrode"Whitelocke,  Esq. 

Humphry  Salloway,  Esq. 

Mr.  Serjeant  Wild 

Oliver  St.  John,  Esq.,  Solicitor 


Sir  Benjamin  Rudyard 
John  Pym,  Esq. 
Sir  John  Clotworthy 
John  jMa'^nard,  Es'^. 
Sir  Henry  Vane,  Junior 
William  Pierpoint,  Esq. 
William  Wheeler,  Esq. 
Sir  Thomas  Barrington 
Sir  John  Evelyn 
Mr.  Young 


DIVINES. 


Herbert  Palmer,  B.D.,  of  Ashwell 
Oliver  Bowles,  B.D.,  of  Sutton 
Henry  Wilkinson,  B.D.,  of  Maddesden 
Thomas  Valentine,  B.D.,  of  Chalfont  Giles 
■\^'illiam  Twisse,  D.D.,  of  Newbury 
"William  Reyner,  of  Egham 
HTnnibal  Gammon,  of  Maugan 
Jisper  Hicks,  of  Lawrick 
Joshua  Hoyle,  D.D.,  of  Dublin 
AVilliam  Bridge,  of  Yarmouth 
Thomas  Wincop,  D.D.,  of  Elesworth 
Thomas  Goodwin,  D.D.,  of  London 
John  Ley,  of  Budworth 
Thomas  Case,  of  London 
John  Pyne,  of  Bereferrars 
Francis' AVhidden,  of  Moreton 
Richard  Love,  D.D.,  of  Ekington 
William  Gtouge,  D.D.,  of  Blackfriars 
Ralph  Brownrigg,  D.D.,  Bishop  of  Exeter 
Samuel  Ward,  D.D.,  Master  of  Sydney  Col- 
lege, Cambridge 
John  White,  of  Dorchester 
Edward  Peale,  of  Compton 
Stephen  Marshall,  B.D.,  of  Finchingfield 
Obadiah  Sedgewirk,  B.D.,  of  Coggeshall 
Thomas  Carter,  of  Oxford 
Peter  Clarke,  of  Camaby  or  Kirby 
William  Mew,  B.D.,  of  Essington 
Richard  Capel,  of  Pitchcombc 
Theodore  BackhtTrst,  of  Overton  Wetsville 
Philip  Nye,  of  Kimbolton 
Brocket  Smith,  D.D.,  of  Barkwav 
Cornelius  Burgess,  D.D.,  of  Watford 
Edmund  Staunton.  D.D.,  of  Kingston 
Daniel  Featley,  D.D.,  of  Lambeth 
Francis  Coke,"of  Yoxhall 
John  Lightfoot,  D.D.,  of  Ashley 
EdwardCorbet,  of  Merton  College,  Oxford 
Samuel  Hildersham,  of  Fetton 
John  Langley.  of 'W'est-Tuderlv,  Gloucester 
Christopher  Tisdale,  of  Uphurstlxiurne 


Thomas  Young,  of  Stowmarket 

John  Phillips,  of  ^Vrentham 

Humphrey  Chambers,  B.D.,  of  Claverton 

John  Conant,  B.D.,  of  Lvmington 

Henry  Hall,  B.D.,  of  Norwich 

Henry  Hutton 

Henry  Scudder,  of  Colingboume 

Thomas  Bayley,   B.D.,  of  Manningford 
Bruce 

Benjamin  Pickering,  of  East  Hoatly 

Henry  Nye,  of  Clapham 

Arthur  s'allaway,  of  Severn  Stoake 

Sidrach  Simpson,  of  London 

Anthony  Burgess,  of  Sutton-Coldfield 

Richard  Vines,  of  Calcot 

William  Greenhill,  of  Stepney 

William  Moreton,  of  Newcastle 
Richard  Buckley 

Thomas  Temple,  D.D.,  of  Battersey 
Josias  Shute,  B.D.,  Lombard  Street 
William  Nicholson,  D.D.,  afterwards  Bi- 
shop of  Gloucester 
John  Green,  of  Pencombe 
Stanley  Gower,  of  Brampton 
Francis  Tavlor,  of  Yalding 
Thomas  Wilson,  of  Otham 
Anthony  Tuckney,  D.D.,  of  Boston 
Thomas  Coleman,  of  Bliton 
Charles  Herle,  of  Winwick 
Richard  Horrick,  of  Manchester 
Richard  Clayton,  of  Showell 
George  Gipps,  of  Ayleston 
Calibute  Downing.'D.D..  of  Hackney 
Jeremiah  Burroughs,  of  Stepney 
Edmund  Calamv.^B.D.,  of  Aldermanbury 
George  Walker.  B.D.,  of  London 
Jose])h  Caryl,  of  Lincoln's  Inn,  London 
La/anis  Seaman,  B.D..  of  London 
John  Harris,  D.D.,  Warden  of  Winchester 

College 
George  ^forley   D.D.,  of  Minden  Hall 


38 


HISTORY    OF    THE 


KJ'.vard  Reynolds,  D-D.,  of  Brampton 
Thomas  Hill,  B-D.,  of  Tickmarsh 
Kobert    Saunderson,   D.D.,   of    Boothby- 

Parnell 
John  Foxcroft,  of  Gotham 
John  Jackson,  of  Marsac 
William  Carter,  of  London 
Thomas  Thoi-oughgood,  of  Massingham 
John  Arrowsmith,  D.D.,  of  Lynn 
Robert  Harris,  B.D.,  of  Hanwell 
Robert  Cross,  B.D.,  of  Lincoln  College 
James  Ussher,  Archbishop  of  Armagh 
Matthias  Styles,  D.C,  of  Eastcheap,  London 
Samuel  Gibson,  of  Burleigh 
Jeremiah  Whittaker,  of  Stretton 
Thomas  Gataker,  B.D.,  of  Rotherhithe 
James  VVelbv,  of  Sylatten 
Christopher  Pashly,  D.D.,  of  Hawarden 
Henry  Tor.er,  B.D.,  of  Oxford 
William  Spurstow,  D.D.,  of  Hampden 
Francis  Cheynel,  D.D.,  of  Petworth 
Edward  Ellis,  B.D.,  of  Gilsfield 
John  Hacket,  D.D.,  of  St.  Andrew's.London 


Samuel  de  la  Place  )  French  Congicg* 
John  de  la  March     )  tions 

Matthew  Newcomen,  of  Dedham 
William  Lyford,  ofSherboume 
Wiiriom  Carter,  of  Dynton 
William  Lance,  of  Harrow 
Thomas  Hodges,  of  Kensington 
Andrew  Perne,  of  Wisby 
Thomas  Westfield,  D.D.,  Bishop  of  Bristol 
Henry  Hammond,  D.D.,  of  Penshurst 
Nicholas  Proffit,  of  Marlborough 
Peter  Sterry,  of  London 
John  Erle/of  Bishopston 
John  Gibbon,  of  Waltham 
Henrv  Painter,  B.D.,  of  Exeter 
Thomas  Micklethwait,  of  Cherry  burton 
John  Wincop,  D.D.,  of  St.  Martin's  in  th« 

Fields 
William    Price,    of    St.    Paul's,    Covent 

Garden 
Henry  Wilkinson,  D.D.,  of  St.  Dunstan's 
Richard  Holdsworth,  D.D,  of  Cambridge 
William  Dunning,  of  Godalston 


SCOTTISH  MEMBERS. 
Lay  Assessors  or  Elders. 
John,  Lord  Maitland  |  Sir  Archibald  Johnston,  of  Warriston 

Jllinisters. 

Alexander  Henderson,  of  Edinburgh  I  Samuel  Rutherford,  of  St.  Andrew's 

George  Gillespie,  of  Edinburgh  |  Robert  Baillie,  of  Glasgow 

SCRIBES  OR  CLERKS. 
Henry  Roborough         \         Adoniram  Byfield  |  John  Wallis 

Of  this  list,  about  tAventy-five  never  appeared  at  the  As- 
sembly, one  or  two  having  died  about  the  time  of  the  meet- 
ing of  the  Assembly,  and  others  fearing  the  displeasure  of 
the  king,  or  having  a  preference  for  the  prelatic  system. 
In  order  to  supply  the  deficiency  thus  caused,  and  also  oc- 
casional diminution  caused  by  death  during  the  protracted 
sittings  of  the  Assembly,  the  Parliament  summoned  about 
twenty-one  additional  members,  who  were  termed  the  su 
peradded  divines.  The  following  is  a  list  of  their  names, 
as  far  as  is  known  : — 


Mr.  John  Bond 
Mr.  Boulton 
Richard  By  field 
Ihilip  Delme 
William  Goad 
Humphrey  Hardwick 
Christopher  Love 
\^'illiara  Massam 


Daniel  Cawdrey,  of  Great 

Billing 
Mr.  Johnson 

Thomas  Dillingham,  of  Dean 
John  Maynard 
William  Newscore 
John    Strickland,    BD.,  of 

New  Sarum 


Mr.  Strong,  of  Westminster 

John  Wan! 

Thomas  Ford 

John  Drurv 

William  Rathband,  of  High 

gate 
Simeon  Ashe,  of  St.  Bride's 
Ml.  Moore 


There  were  thus,  in  whole,  thirty-two  lay  assessors,  in- 
cluding those  from  Scotland  ;  and  one  hundred  and  forty- 
two  divines,   includinjr  the  four   Scottish   commissioners. 


"VVESTMLNSTER  ASSEMBLY.  93 

But  of  tliese  only  sixty-nine  iippcared  tlic  first  dny  ;  and, 
generally,  the  attendance  appears  to  have  ranf^ed  between 
sixty  and  eighty.  There  are  one  hundred  and  two  divines 
named  in  the  common  editions  of  the  Confession  of  Faith  j 
but  several  of  these  there  named  were  not  regular  in  their 
attendance.  Not  more  than  from  a  dozen  to  a  score  spoke 
frequently  ;  many  Aery  learned  and  able  men  being  con- 
tented to  listen,  to  think,  and  to  vote.  The  three  scribes 
had  no  votes,  being  sufficiently  employed  in  recording  the 
propositions  brought  forw^ard,  the  progress  of  the  discus- 
sion, and  the  state  of  the  vote  when  taken.  Dr.  Twisse, 
of  Newbury,  was  appointed  prolocutor,  and  after  his  death 
he  was  succeeded  by  Mr.  Herle  ;  Dr.  Burgess  of  Watford, 
and  Mr.  White  of  Dorchester,  were  assessors  to  the  prolo- 
cutor, to  take  the  chair  during  his  occasional  absence. 

It  may  serve  to  show  the  w^ish  of  the  Parliament  to  act 
with  fairness  and  impartiality,  to  state,  that  they  named 
men  of  all  shades  of  opinions  in  matters  of  Church  gov- 
ernment, in  order  that  the  whole  subject  might  be  fully 
discussed.  In  the  original  ordinance,  four  bishops  were 
named,  one  of  whom  actually  attended  on  the  first  day, 
and  another  excused  his  absence  on  the  ground  of  necessa- 
ry duty;  of  the  others  called,  five  became  bishops  after- 
wards ;  and  about  twenty-five  declined  attending,  partly 
because  it  was  not  a  regular  convocation  called  by  the 
king,  and  partly  because  the  Solemn  League  and  Covenant 
was  expressly  condemned  by  his  majesty. 

At  length  the  appointed  day  came  ;  and  on  Saturday,  the 
first  of  July,  the  members  of  the  two  Houses  of  Parliament 
nan)ed  in  the  ordinance,  and  manj^  of  the  divines  therein 
mentioned,  and  a  vast  congregation,  met  in  the  Abbey 
Church,  Westminster.  Dr.  Twisse,  the  appointed  prolo- 
cutor of  the  Assembly,  preached  an  elaborate  sermon  from 
the  text,  John  xiv.  18  :  "1  will  not  leave  you  comfortless, 
1  will  come  unto  you."  After  sermon  all  the  members 
present  adjourned  to  Henry  VII. 's  Chapel  5  and  the  roll  of 
members  being  called,  it  appeared  that  there  were  sixty- 
nine  clerical  members  present  on  that  the  first  day  of  the 
Westminster  Assembly.  But  as  there  had  been  no  specific 
instructions  given,  nor  any  subject  prepared  for  their  im- 
mediate discussion,  the  Assembly  adjourned  till  the  follow- 
ing Thursday. 


100  HISTOKY  OF  THE 

This  very  fact  points  out  one  peculiarity  of  the  "West- 
minster Assembly,  to  which  allusion  has  been  made.  I* 
v.as  neither  a  Convocation,  nor  a  Presbyterian  Synod  or 
General  Assembly ;  and  it  could  not  be  either  the  one  or 
the  other,  for  the  prelatic  form  of  Church  government  had 
been  abelished,  and  there  was  no  other  yet  in  existence. 
'I'he  true  theory  of  the  Westminster  Assembly  comprises 
two  main  elements — there  was  a  Christian  Church  in  Eng- 
land, but  not  organized :  and  the  civil  povrer,  avowing 
Christianity,  had  called  an  assembly  of  Divines,  for  the 
purpose  of  consulting  together  respecting  those  points  of 
crovernment  and  discipline  which  require  the  sanction  of 
civil  authority  for  their  full  efficiency.  Such  an  Assembly 
could  have  been  called  only  by  a  Christian  civil  magistrate  ; 
and  only  in  a  transition  state  of  the  Church,  when  disor- 
ganized, or  not  yet  duly  constituted.  In  such  a  state  of 
matters,  the  problem  to  be  solved  was  this  :  on  what  terms 
could  a  National  Church  be  constitut-^.d,  so  as  neither  to  en- 
croach upon  civil  liberty,  as  the  papal  and  prelatic  churches 
had  done,  not  to  yield  up  those  inherent  spiritual  rights, 
privileges,  and  liberties  which  are  essential  to  a  Church  of 
Christ.  And  for  that  purpose,  it  was  almost  indifferent, 
whether'the  State  should  first  mention  the  terms  on  which 
it  would  establish  a  National  Church,  or  the  Church  specify 
the  terms  on  which  it  would  consent  to  be  established; 
only,  that  the  latter  would  have  been  the  simpler  and  the 
purer  method  of  making  the  arrangement.  The  former, 
however,  was  the  nlan  adopted  ;  and,  for  that  reason,  the 
statement  of  the  propositions  came  from  Parliament. 

When  the  Assembly  again  met  on  the  Thursday,  the  fol- 
lowing instructions  were  laid  before  them,  as  general  regu- 
lations, directed  by  the  Lords  and  Commons  in  Parliament 
assembled.  1.  That  two  assessors  be  joined  to  the  prolocu- 
tor, to  supply  his  place  in  case  of  absence  or  infirmity.  2. 
That  scribes  be  appointed  to  set  down  all  proceedings,  and 
those  to  be  divines,  who  are  out  of  the  Assembly,  namely, 
Mr.  Henry  Roborough,  and  Mr.  Adoniram  Byfield.  3. 
Every  member,  at  his  first  entrj''  into  the  Assembly,  shall 
make  serious  and  solemn  protestation,  not  to  maintain  any- 
thing but  what  he  believes  to  be  truth  in  sincerity,  when 
discovered  to  him.  4.  No  resolution  to  be  given  upon  any 
question  the  same  day  whevein   il    is  first  propounded.      5 


WESTMINSTF.K    ASsRMliLY.  101 

What  any  man  undertakes  to  prove  as  necessary,  1ie  shall 
make  good  out  of  Scripture.  6.  No  man  to  proceed  in 
any  dispute  after  the  prolocutor  has  enjoined  h  in  silenco, 
unless  the  Assembly  desire  he  may  go  on.  7  No  man  to 
be  denied  to  enter  his  dissent  from  the  Assembly,  and  his 
reasons  for  it,  in  any  point,  after  it  hath  been  first  debated 
in  the  Assembly,  and  thence  (if  tlie  dissenting  party  desire 
ii)  to  be  sent  to  the  Houses  of  Parliament  by  the  Assem- 
bly, not  by  any  particular  man  or  men,  in  a  private  way, 
when  either  House  shall  require.  8.  All  things  agreed  on, 
and  prepared  for  the  Parliament,  to  be  openly  read  and  al- 
lowed in  the  Assembly,  and  then  offered  as  the  judgment 
of  tbe  Assembly,  if  the  major  part  assent ; — provided  that 
the  opinion  of  any  persons  dissenting,  and  the  reasons 
urged  for  it,  be  annexed  thereunto,  if  the  dissenters  require 
it,  together  with  the  solutions,  if  any  were  given  to  the 
Assembly,  to  these  reasons.* 

To  these  general  regulations  the  Assembly  added  some 
for  their  own  guidance.  1.  That  every  session  begin  and 
end  with  prayer.  2.  That  after  the  first  prayer  the  names 
of  the  Assembly  be  called  over,  and  those  that  are  absent 
marked;  but  if  any  member  comes  in  afterwards  he  shall 
have  liberty  to  give  in  his  name  to  the  scribes.  3.  That 
the  appointed  hour  of  meeting  be  ten  in  the  morning  ;  the 
afternoon  to  be  reserved  for  committees.  4.  That  three 
of  the  members  of  the  Assembly  be  appointed  weekly  as 
chaplains,  one  to  the  House  of  Lords,  another  to  the  House 
of  Commons,  and  a  third  to  the  Committee  of  both 
kingdoms. 

It  was  also  resolved,  that  every  member  of  the  Assem- 
bly, both  Lords  and  Commons,  as  well  as  divines,  before 
his  admission  to  sit    and   vote,  should  take  the  following 

vow  or    protestation:  "I,   ,    do    seriously  promise 

and  vow,  in  the  presence  of   Almighty  God,  that   in  this 
Assembly,  whereof  I  am  a  member,  I  will  maintain  nothing 
in  point  of  doctrine  but  what  I  believe  to  be   most  agreea- 
ble   to  the   Word    of  God  ;  nor  in  point  of   discipline,  but 
what  I  shall  conceive  to  conduce  most  to  the  glory  of  God, 
and  the  good  and  peace  of  His  Church."    This  protestation 
was  appointed  to  be   read   afresh  every  Monday  morning 
that  its  solemn  influence  might  be  constantly  felt. 
*  Lightfool's  "Works,  vol.  xiii.  pp.  3,4. 
9* 


102  HISTORY    OF    THE 

In  order  that  business  might  proceed  regularly  and  ei 
peditiously,  the  whole  Assembly  was  cast  into  three  equa 
committees  ;  the  divines  according  to  the  order  in  which 
their  names  stood  in  the  ordinance  j  and  the  Lords  and 
Commons  into  three  corresponding  divisions,  according  to 
their  order  also.  Each  committee  chose  for  itself  a  chair- 
man :  the  first  chose  Dr.  Cornelius  Burgess  ;  the  second, 
Dr.  Staunton  ;  and  the  third,  Mr.  Gibbon.  The  account 
of  the  Assembly's  order  of  procedure  given  by  Baillie  is  at 
once  so  graphic  and  so  complete,  that  we  cannot  do  better 
than  extract  the  entire  passage,  merely  modernizing  any 
peculiarities  in  spelling   or  obsolete  expressions. 

"The  like  of  that  Assembly  I  did  never  see,  and  as  we  hearsay, 
the  like  was  never  in  England,  nor  anywhere  is  shortly  like  to  be. 
They  did  sit  in  Henry  the  VII. 's  Chaj^el,  in  the  place  of  the  Convoca- 
tion;  but  since  the  weather  grew  cold,  they  did  go  to  the  Jerusalem 
Chamber,  a  fair  room  in  the  Abbey  of  Westminster,  about  the  size  of 
the  College  front-hall,  but  wider.  At  the  one  end  nearest  the  door,  and 
along  both  sides,  are  stages  of  seats,  as  in  the  new  Assembly  House  at 
Edinburgh,  but  not  so  high  ;  for  there  '"ill  be  room  but  for  five  or  six 
score.  At  the  uppermost  end  there  is  a  chair  set  on  a  frame,  a  foot  from 
the  earth,  for  the  Mr.  Prolocutor,  Dr.  Twisse.  Bet^ore  it,  on  the  ground, 
stand  two  chairs  for  the  two  Mr.  Assessors,  Dr.  Burgess  and  Mr. 
White.  Before  these  two  chairs,  through  the  length  of  the  room,  stands 
a  table,  at  which  sit  the  two  scribes,  Mr,  Byfield  and  Mr.  Roborough. 
The  house  is  all  well  hung  (with  tapestry),  and  has  a  good  fire,  which 
is  some  dainties  at  London.  Opposite  the  table,  upon  the  prolocutor's 
right  hand,  there  are  three  or  four  ranks  of  benches.  On  the  lowest  we 
five  do  sit.  Upon  the  other,  at  our  backs,  the  members  of  Parliament 
deputed  to  the  Assembly.  On  the  benches  opposite  us,  on  the  prolocu- 
tor's left  hand,  going  from  the  upper  end  of  the  house  to  the  chimney, 
and  at  the  other  end  of  the  house  and  back  of  the  table,  till  it 
come  about  to  our  seats,  are  four  or  five  stages  of  benches,  upon 
which  their  divines  sit  as  they  please ;  albeit  commonly  they  keep 
the  same  place.  From  the  chimney  to  the  door  there  are  no  seats,  but 
a  void  space  for  passage.  The  Lords  of  the  Parliament  use  to  sit  on 
chairs,  in  that  void,  about  the  fire.  We  meet  every  day  of  the  week  but 
Saturday.  We  sit  commonly  from  nine  till  one  or  two  afternoon.  The 
prolocutor,  at  the  beginning  and  end,  has  a  short  prayer.  The  man,  as 
the  world  knows,  is  very  learned  in  the  questions  he  has  studied,  and 
very  good,  beloved  of  all,  and  highly  esteemed;  but  merely  bookish,  not 
much,  as  it  seems,  acquainted  with  conceived  prayer,  and  among  the 
unfittest  of  all  the  company  for  any  action  ;  so  after  the  prayer  he  sits 
mute.  It  was  the  canny  convoyance  (skilful  management)  of  those  who 
guide  mostmntters  for  their  own  interest  to  plant  such  a  man  of  purpose 
in  the  chair.  The  one  assessor,  our  good  friend,  Mr.  White,  has  keeped 
in  of  the  gout  since  our  coming;  the  other.  Dr.  Burgess,  a  very  active 
and  sharp  man,  supplies,  so  far  as  is  decent,  the  prolocutor's  place 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBLY.  103 

Orvlinarily  theie  will  be  present  above  three  score  of  their  divines. 
These  are  divided  into  three  coniinitt(M-s,  in  (jne  of  which  every  man  is 
a  member.  No  man  is  excluded  who  pleases  to  come  to  any  of  the 
three.  Every  committee,  as  the  Parliament  gives  order  in  writinj^  to 
take  any  pur|)0se  to  consideration,  takes  a  portion,  and  in  their  after- 
noon meetina:,  prepares  matters  for  the  Asseml)ly,  sets  down  their  minds 
ill  distinct  propositions,  backing  their  propositions  with  texts  of  Scripture. 
After  the  prayer,  Mr.  Byfield,  the  scribe,  reads  the  proposition  and 
Scriptures,  whereupon  the  Assembly  debates  in  a  mcst  grave  and  orderly 
way. 

"No  man  is  called  up  to  speak  ;  but  whosoever  stands  up  of  his  own 
accord,  speaks  so  long  as  he  will  without  interruption.  If  two  or  three 
stand  up  at  once,  then  the  divines  confusedly  call  on  his  name  whom 
they  desire  to  hear  first:  on  whom  the  loudest  and  manicst  voices  call, 
he  speaks.  No  man  speaks  to  any  but  to  the  prolocutor.  They 
harangue  long  and  very  learnedlie.  They  study  the  questions  well 
beforehand,  and  prepare  their  speeches  ;  but  withal  the  men  are  exceeding 
prompt  and  well  spoken.  I  do  marvel  at  the  very  accurate  and  extem- 
poral  replies  th.at  many  of  them  usually  make.  When,  upon  every 
proposition  by  itself,  and  on  every  text  of  Scripture  that  is  brought  to 
confirm  it,  every  man  who  will  has  said  his  whole  mind,  and  the  replies, 
duplies,  and  triplies  are  heard,  then  the  most  part  call,  "  To  the 
question."  Byfield,  the  scribe,  rises  from  the  table,  and  comes  to  the 
prolocutor's  chair,  wlio,  from  the  scribe's  book,  reads  the  proposition, 
and  says,  "  As  many  as  are  of  opinion  that  the  question  is  well  stated 
in  the  proposition,  let  them  say,  Aye  ;"  when  aye  is  heard  he  says,  "As 
many  as  think  otherwise,  say.  No."  If  the  difference  of  "  Aye's"  and 
No's"  be  cleat,  as  usually  it  is,  then  the  question  is  ordered  by  the 
scribes,  and  they  go  on  to  debate  the  first  Scripture  alleged  for  proof  of 
the  proposition.  If  the  sound  of  Aye  and  No  be  near  equal  then  says 
the  prolocutor,  "As  many  as  say  Aye,  stand  up;"  while  they  stand,  the 
scribe  and  others  number  them  in  their  minds;  when  they  sit  down,  the 
No's  are  bidden  stand,  and  they  likewise  are  numbered.  This  way  is 
clear  enough,  and  saves  a  great  deal  of  time,  which  we  spend  in  reading 
our  catalogue.  When  a  question  is  once  ordered,  there  is  no  more 
debate  of  that  matter;  but  if  a  man  will  wander  from  the  subject,  he  is 
quickly  taken  up  by  Mr.  Assessor,  or  many  others,  confusedly  crying, 
"Speak  to  order,  to  order."  No  man  contradicts  another  expressly  by 
name,  but  most  discreetly  speaks  to  the  prolocutor,  and  at  most  holds  to 
general  terms  :  "  The  reverend  brother  who  lately,  or  last,  spoke,  on  this 
hand,  on  that  side,  above,  or  below."  I  thought  meet  once  for  all  to  give 
you  a  taste  of  the  outward  form  of  their  Assembly.  They  follow  the  way 
of  their  Parliament.  Much  of  their  way  is  good,  and  worthy  of  our 
imitation;  only  their  lonirsomeness  is  woful  at  this  time,  when  their 
Church  and  kingdom  lie  under  a  most  lamentable  anarchy  and  confusion. 
They  see  the  hurt  of  their  length,  but  cannot  get  it  helped  ;  for  being  to 
establish  a  new  platform  of  worship  and  discipline  to  their  nation  for  all 
time  to  come,  they  think  they  cannot  be  answerable,  if  solidly,  and  at 
leisure,  they  do  not  examine  every  point  thereof."* 

Having  made  these  preliminary  arrangements,  the  Par* 

♦  Baillie,  vol.  ii.  pp.  108,  109. 


104  HISTORY    OF    THE 

liament  sent  the  Assembly  an  order  to  revise  the  Thirty 
nine  Articles,  for  the  jDiirpose  of  simplifying,  clearing,  and 
vindicating  the  doctrines  therein  contained.  The  dis- 
charge of  this  task  was  begun  in  the  committees,  and 
reported  from  time  to  time  in  the  Assembly.  On  the  first 
of  these  meetings  to  receive  and  consider  reports,  July 
12th,  "  A  letter,"  says  Lightfoot,  "  came  from  Dr.  Brown- 
rigge.  Bishop  of  Exeter,  to  Dr.  Featly,  or,  in  his  absence, 
to  Dr.  Gouge,  which  was  openly  read,  wherein  he  excus- 
eth  his  non-appearance  in  the  Assembly,  from  the  tie  of 
the  vice-chancellorship  in  the  University  that  lay  upon 
him."*  The  tenor  of  his  excuse  shows  that  lie  at  least  did 
not  condemn  the  calling  of  the  Assembly,  nor  thought  his 
episcopal  function  of  divine  institution.  Indeed  there  were 
many  episcopalians  who  had  not  embraced  the  high  theory 
of  Bancroft  and  Laud,  otherwise  none  could  have  appeared 
in  the  Assembly  at  ail ;  and  yf  t  even  Clarendon  admits, 
that  "about  twenty  of  them  were  reverend  and  worthy 
persons,  and  episcopal  in  their  judgments;"!  and  Fuller 
says,  that  "Dr.  VVestfield  (Bishop  of  Bristol)  and  some 
few  others  seemed  the  only  non-conformists  among  them 
for  their  conformity,  whose  gowns  and  canonical  habits 
differed  from  all  the  rest. "J  From  this  it  aj5pears  that  at 
least  one  bishop  gave  his  presence  to  the  meeting  of  that 
Assembly,  which  so  many  of  his  prelatic  brethren  since 
have  termed  impious  and  rebellious. 

A  new  disaster  having  befallen  the  arms  of  the  Parlia- 
ment in  the  defeat  of  Waller,  the  Assembly  petitioned  the 
Houses  to  appoint  a  fast  throughout  London,  Westminster, 
and  the  suburbs  5  requesting  that  measures  might  be 
speedily  adopted  for  promoting  reformation,  so  that  the 
Divine  wrath  might  be  averted,  and  the  wounds  and  mise- 
ries of  the  kingdom  healed.  This  petition  was  granted  ; 
the  21st  of  July  was  set  apart  as  a  day  of  humiliation, 
fasting,  and  prayer.  Mr.  Hill,  Mr.  Spurstow,  and  Mr. 
Vines,  were  appointed  to  preach  before  the  Houses,  and 
the  day  was  observed  with  great  solemnity  within  the  spe- 
cified boundaries.  From  this  time  forward,  it  was  custom- 
ary to  appoint  similar  fasts,  and  public  sermons  before  the 
Houses  of  Parliament  j  which  sermons  were  printed  by 
order  of  Parliament,  frequently  with   prefaces   before,  or 

•  Lightfoot,  p.  5.  t  Clarendon.  J  Fuller,  vol.  iii.  p.  448. 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBLY.  106 

postscripts  appended  to  them  by  their  authors,  and  having 
been  preserved,  they  form  an  a«lmirahle  mass  of  informa- 
tion regarding  the  actual  sentiments  and  slate  of  feelino-s 
predominant  in  both  the  Parhament  and  the  Assembly, 
characterized  by  all  the  freshness  and  trembliiifr  earnest- 
ness, and  intensity  of  hopes  and  fears  called  forth  by  the 
varying  vicissitudes  of  these  eventful  and  fluctuating 
times.*  The  same  circumstance  proves,  that  on  the  part 
of  the  Parliament,  the  struo-orle  in  which  they  were  engaged 
was  by  themselves  regarded  as  to  the  full  as  much  of  a 
religious  as  of  a  political  character;  and  that  they  were 
not  ashamed  to  acknowledge,  that  they  looked  to  the  favor 
and  the  protection  of  God  for  ultimate  success  in  the 
perilous  and  important  contest.  It  may  be  added,  that 
however  vehemently  the  king  and  his  adherents  asserted 
the  divine  source  of  the  roya-i  prerogative,  we  do  not  find 
that  they  attempted  to  hallow  their  cause,  or  to  seek 
Divine  aid,  by  solemn  religious  acts  ;  but,  on  the  contrary, 
that  in  order  to  draw  the  utmost  possible  breadth  of  dis- 
tinction between  themselves  and  the  Puritans,  they 
delighted  to  indulge  to  excess  in  every  kind  of  licentious- 
ness and  immorality  ;  so  that  they  frequently  alienated 
those  counties  which  Vv  ere  otherwise  friendly  to  the  royal 
cause,  and  drove,  the  oppressed  people  into  the  ranks  of 
the  parliamentary  armies,  as  the  only  waj^  to  rescue  them- 
selves and  their  families  from  the  vicious  brutalities  of  the 
proud  and  tyrannical  cavaliers. 

The  Assembly  continued  to  discuss  the  Thirty-nine 
Articles,  and  expended  ten  weeks  in  debating  upon  the 
first  fifteen.  But  upon  the  arrival  of  the  Scottish  Commis- 
sioners, or  rather,  soon  after  the  signing  of  the  Solemn 
League  and  Covenant,  a  new  direction  was  given  to  the 
whole  course  of  discussion  ;  so  that  it  is  unnecessary  to 
trace  that  part  of  the  proceedings  which  led  to  no  practical 
result,  and  which,  terminating  abruptly  and  unfinished, 
cannot  properly  be  said  to  form  any  part  of  the  Assembly's 
actual  proceedings.  Let  us  rather  turn  to  the  origin  of 
the  Solemn  League  and  Covenant  itself. 

When  the  English  Parliament  determined  upon  the  abo- 

*  For  the  use  of  perhaps  the  most  complete  collection  of  these  ser- 
mons extant,  the  author  is  indebted  to  the  kindness  and  courtesy  of  ih* 
Rev.  Mr.  Craig  of  Rothsay. 


106  HISTORY  OF    THE 

lition  of  the  Prelatic  hierarchy,  they  at  the  same  time  sug- 
gested the  calling  of  an  Assembly  of  Divines  to  deliberate 
respectinor  the  new  form  to  be  established  ;  and  they  also 
applied  to  the  Church  of  Scotland  to  send  commissioners 
to  the  intended  Assembly.  The  Scottish  Church  nominat- 
ed some  ministers  and  elders  to  be  in  readiness  ;  but  the 
English  Assembly  not  having  been  called  till  nearly  a  year 
had  elapsed,  serious  doubts  began  to  be  entertained  in 
Scotland  respecting  their  sincerity,  especially  when  no 
authorized  person  appeared  at  the  Convention  of  Estates 
held  on  the  22d  June,  and  prolonged  during  a  fortnight. 
At  length  a  messenger  arrived,  stating  that  the  Assembly 
had  met,  and  renewing  their  application  for  the  presence 
of  Scottish  commissioners.*  As  the  General  Assembly 
was  to  meet  on  the  '2d  of  August,  and  the  Convention  of 
Estates  at  the  same  time,  the  matter  was  refe'^red  till  then, 
that  it  might  be  fully  and  authoritatively  arranged. 

After  several  ckiys  of  anxious  expectation  by  the  Scottish 
General  Assembly,  the  English  commissioners  arrived  on 
the  7th  of  August,  and  were  received  by.  a  deputation  of 
the  Assembly  on  the  following  day.  The  English  commis- 
sioners were,  from  the  Lords,  the  E  xrl  of  Rutland  and  Lord 
Gray  of  Wark,  the  latter  of  whom  declined  the  journey; 
from  the  Commons,  Sir  William  Armyn,  Sir  Harry  Vane 
the  younger,  Mr.  Hatcher,  and  Mr.  Darley  ;  and  from  the 
Assembly  of  Divines,  Mr.  Marshall  and  Mr.  Nye.  They 
presented  their  commission,  giving  them  ample  powers  to 
treat  with  the  Scottish  Convention  and  Assembly, — a  De- 
claration of  both  the  English  Houses, — a  letter  from  the 
Westminster  Assembly,  and  a  letter  i  ibscribed  by  above 
seventy  of  their  divines,  supplicating  lia  in  their  desperate 
condition.  "  This  letter,"  says  Baillit;,  "  was  so  lamentable 
that  it  drew  tears  from  many."f  The  leading  statesmen 
and  divines  in  Scotland  immediately  took  these  matters  into 
serious  and  most  anxious  deliberation.  All  were  of  opi- 
nion that  it  was  necessary  to  assist  the  English ;  but  how 
that  assistance  should  be  given  they  could  not  so  readily 
determine.  At  one  time  the  prevalent  idea  was,  that  Scot- 
land should  interpose  as  a  mediating  power,  without  alto- 

•  Baillie,  vol.  ii.  p.  80. 

t  Ibid.,  vol.  ii.  p.  89.     All  the  documents  referred  to,  with  their  at*. 
Bwers,  may  be  seen  in  the  Acts  of  Assembly,  1643. 


WESTMINSTER  ASSEMBLY.  107 

gether  taking  pnrt  with  the  Parliament ;  but  a  iriore  careful 
and  full  deliberation  convinced  theip  that  this  was  imprac- 
ticable. They  had  learned  by  sad  experience,  that  the 
king's  most  solemn  treaties  could  not  be  depended  on, 
when  they  had  seen  the  treaty  concluded  at  Dunse  ordered 
to  be  burned  by  the  hands  of  the  hangman,  and  themselves 
denounced  as  rebels.  And  as  the  English  Parliament  had 
not  hitherto  exhibited  any  similar  insincerity,  there  was  no 
reason  for  equal  distrust  with  regard  to  their  declarations  ; 
while  the  Scottish  statesmen  and  ministers  could  not  but 
perceive,  that  if  the  king  should  succeed  in  subjugating  his 
English  Parliament,  he  would  then  be  able  to  assail  Scot- 
land with  an  irresistible  force. 

Still  there  was  one  difficult  point.  The  English  com- 
missioners sought  to  enter  into  a  civil  league  with  Scotland, 
for  the  defence  of  the  civil  liberties  of  both  countries. 
But  as  the  entire  spirit  of  the  contest  in  which  Scotland 
had  been  engaged  was  of  a  religious  character,  in  defence 
of  religious  liberty,  and  had  been  conducted  to  a  prosper- 
ous issue  by  the  strength  of  a  religious  covenant  into  which 
the  nation  had  entered,  the  Convention  and  Assembly  in- 
sisted upon  a  religious  covenant  between  the  two  kingdoms. 
To  this  the  English  commissioners  at  length  assented,  on 
the  suggestion  of  Sir  Harry  Vane,  that  the  two  ideas  might 
very  properly  be  combined;  and  hence  the  bond  of  union 
between  the  two  countries  ^vas  so  framed  as  to  embrace 
both  subjects,  and  received  the  designation  of  The  Solemn 
League  and  Covenant. 

This  important  document  was  framed  by  the  celebrated 
Alexander  Henderson,  moderator  of  the  Assembly,  and  laid 
before  the  English  commissioners.  At  first  they  startled 
somewhat  at  its  terms,  some  of  them  Vv^ishing  for  a  greater 
latitude  of  expression,  to  leave  room  for  the  introduction 
of  the  Independent  or  Congregational  system.  In  this,  too, 
a  slight  compromise  was  made,  no  specific  plan  for  the 
reformation  of  religion  in  England  or  Ireland  being  stated, 
except  that  it  should  be  "  according  to  the  Word  of  God, 
and  the  example  of  the  best  reformed  Churches."  With 
this  mode  of  expressing  the  general  principle,  all  were  sa- 
tisfied ;  and  after  receiving  the  approbation  of  the  private 
committees,  the  Solemn  League  and  Covenant  was  sub- 
mittej   to  the   General   Assembly  on  the   17th  of  August, 


108  HISTORY  OJr    fUt 

1643,  passed  imanimously*  amidst  the  applause  of  some, 
and  the  bursting  tears  of  a  deep,  full,  and  sacred  joy  of 
others;  and  in  the  afternoon,  with  the  same  cordial  una- 
nimity, passed  the  Convention  of  Estates.  "  This,"  says 
Baillie,  "  seems  to  be  a  new  period  and  crisis  of  the  most 
great  affair  which  these  hundred  years  has  exercised  these 
dominions."  He  was  not  mistaken;  it  was  indeed  the 
commencement  of  a  new  period  in  the  history  of  the  Chris- 
tian Church,  though  that  period  has  not  yet  run  its  full 
round,  nor  reached  its  crisis, —  a  crisis  which  will  shake 
and  new-mould  the  world. 

It  is  customary  for  a  certain  class  of  writers  to  say,  that 
in  the  discussion  respecting  the  Solemn  League  and  Cove- 
nant, there  was  a  contest  of  cunning  between  the  English 
commissioners  and  the  Scottish  Covenanters,  and  that  the 
superior  subtlety  of  Sir  Harry  Vane  enabled  him  to  beguile 
the  Scottish  negotiators,  who,  in  their  blind  attachment  to 
their  own  Presbyterian  system,  could  not  conceive  that  any- 
thing else  was  meant  by  the  expression,  "  The  best  re- 
formed Churches."  This  is  but  a  w^eak  invention  of  the 
enemy.  In  the  beginning  of  the  year  1641,  the  Scottish 
commissioners  had  both  suggested  the  idea  of  a  closer 
agreement  between  the  Churches  of  England  and  Scotland, 
and  disclaimed  the  presumption  of  urging  their  system 
upon  the  mightier  kingdom.f  And  in  the  ordinance  sum- 
moning the  Assembly,  one  object  is  said  to  be,  to  obtain 
"a  nearer  agreement  with  the  Church  of  Scotland,  and 
other  reformed  Churches  abroad."  Further,  the  Church 
of  Scotland  had  delayed  the  framing  of  a  directory,  very 
much  that  she  might  be  the  more  at  liberty  to  accommo- 
date her  procedure  to  what  might  be  resolved  upon  by  the 
English  Assembly,  when  it  should  have  accomplished  its' 
task.  It  would  appear,  therefore,  that  there  was  no  craft 
nor  overreaching  on  either  side  ;  and  that,  so  far  as  there 
was  a  compromise,  it  was  one  of  candor  and  frankness, 
well  understood  by  both  parties,  for  the  purpose  of  leaving 
matters  open  to  a  full  and  fair  discussion. 

When  the  Solemn  League  and  Covenant  had  thus  re- 

*  The  Lord  High  Commissioner,  Sir  Thomas  Hope,  declined  assent 
ing  to  the  Covenant  in  his  official  capacity,  but  personally  he  gave  his 
eordial  concurrence. 

t  See  Appendix, 


WESTMINSTER  ASSEMBLY.  109 

ceived  the  assent  of  theScottif^li  Convention  of  Estates  and 
General  Assembly,  a  copy  of  it  was  sent  to  the  English 
Parliament  and  the  Westminster  Divines,  for  their  con- 
sideration. Commissioners  were  appointed  to  attend  that 
Assembly,  pai'tly  elders  and  partly  ministers.  The  elders 
were,  the  Earl  of  Cassilis,  Lord  Maitland,  and  Johnston  of 
Warriston  ;  the  ministers  were,  Messrs.  Henderson,  Baillie, 
Gillespie.  Rutherford,  and  Douglas  ;  but  neither  the  Earl 
of  Cassilis  nor  Mr.  Robert  Douglas  ever  attended,  so  that 
the  Scottish  commissioners  were  six  in  all.  \Vhen  the 
document  reached  Westminster,  several  days  were  spent 
by  the  English  divines  in  considering  its  various  proposi- 
tions, and  some  slight  verbal  alterations  were  made,  for 
the  sake  of  explanation, — particularly  the  specific  state- 
ment of  what  is  meant  by  Prelacy  ;  and  at  last  it  was 
agreed  to  by  all  except  Dr.  Burgess,  who  continued  to  re- 
sist it,  and  to  refuse  his  assent  for  several  days,  till  he  in- 
curred the  serious  displeasure  of  both  Assembly  and  Par- 
liament,— which  he  at  last  averted  by  yielding.* 

Immediately  after  the  rising  of  their  own  General  As- 
sembly, three  of  the  Scottish  commissioners,  Lord  Mait- 
land, Alexander  Henderson,  and  George  Gillespie,  set  off 
for  London  ;  the  other  three  followed  about  a  month  after- 
wards. On  the  15th  of  September  the  Scottish  commis- 
sioners were  received  into  the  Westminster  Assembly  with 
great  kindness  and  courtesy,  and  welcomed  in  three  suc- 
cessive speeches,  by  the  Prolocutor,  by  Dr.  Hoyle,  and  by 
Mr.  Case.  Mr.  Henderson  replied,  expressing  the  deep 
sympathy  felt  by  the  kingdom  and  Church  of  Scotland  for 
the  sufferings  of  England,  and  the  readiness  with  which 
they  would  to  the  utmost  assist  the  good  work  of  religious 
reformation  thus  began.  The  Solemn  League  and  Cove- 
nant was  then  read  over  clause  by  clause,  and  explanations 
given  where  it  seemed  of  doubtful  import,  till  the  whole  re- 
ceived the  sanction  of  the  Assembly.  It  was  then  appoint- 
ed by  the  Parliament  and  assented  to  by  the  Assembly, 
that  the  Covenant  should  be  publicly  taken  by  these  bodies 
on  the  25th  of  September.     On  that  day,  accordingly,  the 

♦  The  ansry  language  of  Dr.  Lightfoot  is  positively  ludicrous  : — "  A 
wretch  that  ought  to  be  branded  to  all  posterity,  ^\ho  seeks,  for  some 
devilish  ends,  either  of  his  own  or  others,  or  both,  to  hinder  so  great  a 
good  of  the  two  nations." — Lighffool,  vol.  xiii.  p.  12. 
10 


110  HISTORY  OF  THE 

House  of  Commons,  with  the  Assembly  of  Divines  and  the 
Scottish  commissioners,  met  in  the  Church  of  St.  Marga- 
ret's, Westminster;  and  the  Rev.  Mr.  White  of  Dorches- 
ter, one  of  the  assessors,  commenced  the  solemnity  with 
prayer.  Mr.  Nye  then  addressed  the  dignified  and  grave 
audience  in  a  speech  of  an  hour's  duration,  pointinof  out  the 
Scripture  authority  of  such  covenants,  and  the  advantage 
of  which  they  had  been  productive  to  the  Church  of  God 
in  all  ages.  Mr.  Henderson  followed  in  a  speech  consider- 
ably shorter,  but  of  great  dignity  and  power.  Mr.  Nye 
then  read  it  from  the  pulpit,  slowly  and  aloud,  pausing  at 
the  close  of  every  article,  while  the  whole  audience  of 
sUxtesmen  and  divines  arose,  and,  with  their  right  hands 
held  up  to  heaven,  worshipped  the  great  name  of  God,  and 
gave  their  sacred  pledge.*  Then  the  members  of  the 
Jlouse  of  Commons  subscribed  the  Covenant  on  one  roll 
of  parchment,!  and  the  Assembly  on  another  ;  and  when 
this  was  done,  the  solemn  scene  was  closed  by  prayer  and 
praise  to  that  omniscient  God  to  whom  they  had  lifted  up 
their  hands  and  made  their  vows. 

To  complete  in  one  view  the  account  of  this  matter,  the 
Covenant  was  taken  by  the  House  of  Lords  on  the  15th  of 
October,  after  sermon  by  Dr.  Temple,  and  an  exhortation 
by  Mr.  Coleman.  It  was  taken  also  by  the  congregations 
in  and  around  London  on  the  following  Lord's  day. 
On  the  9th  of  October  the  king  issued  a  proclamation 
from  Oxford,  denouncing  this  document  as  "  in  truth 
nothing  else  but  a  traitorous  and  seditious  combination 
against  us  and  the  established  religion  of  this-  king- 
■^.om  ;"  straitly  charging  and  commanding  all  his  loving 
subjects,  upon  their  allegiance,  *'  that  they  presume 
not  to  take  the  said  seditious  and  traitorous  Covenant."]: 
And  at  last  an  order  was  issued  by  the  Parliament,  in 
February;  1644',  commanding  the  Covenant  to  be  taken 
throughout  the  kingdom  of  England  by  all  persons  above 
the  age  of  eighteen  years  ;  which  order  was  accompanied 
by  an  exhortation  prepared  by  the  Assembly  of  Divines. 

*  Rush  worth,  vol.  v.  p   475. 

t  This  roll  was  subscribed  by  two  hundred  and  twenty-eight  members 
of  the  House  of  Commons,  whose  names  may  be  seen  in  Rushworth, 
vol.  V.  pp.  480,  481.  On  that  roll  appears  the  name  of  Oliver  Crom- 
well. 

t  Rushworth,  vol.  v.  p.  482. 


WESTMINSTER    ASSI:MI5L\  .  H 

In  Scotland  as  soon  as  information  was  received  of  what 
had  taken  place  in  London,  the  Committee  of  Estates 
ordered  the  Covenant  to  be  subscribed  by  all  ranks  and 
conditions  of  people,  on  penalty  of  the  confiscation  of  pro- 
perty, or  such  other  punishment  as  his  Ajajesty  and  the 
Parliament  might  resolve  to  inflict.  This  harsh  command 
was  intended  to  bear  against  that  faction  of  the  nobility 
who  were  known  to  have  entered  into  a  secret  confederacy 
with  the  king;  and  its  effect  was,  to  drive  some  into  flight, 
and  all  into  more  desperate  opposition.  But  this,  it  will 
be  observed,  was  the  act  of  the  civil,  not  the  ecclesiastical 
authorities  in  Scotland  ;  and  it  proceeded  mainly  upon  the 
principle,  that  the  bond  thus  enforced  was  not  only  a  reli- 
gious covenant,  but  also  a  civil  league.  It  was  unfortunate 
that  civil  and  religious  matters  should  have  been  so  blended, 
because  whatever  civil  measures  were  adopted,  or  civil 
penalties  were  inflicted,  were  sure  to  be  unfairly  charged 
against  the  religious  element,  instead  of  the  civil,  to  which 
they  truly  owed  their  origin.  But  even  this  unpropitious 
circumstance  was  forced  upon  the  Covenanters;  partly  by 
the  fact  that  the  proceedings  of  the  king  were  equally  hos- 
tile to  civil  and  to  religious  liberty,  and  partly  by  their 
unavoidable  union  with  the  English  Parliament,  in  which 
the  struggle  was  even  more  directly  for  civil  than  for  reli- 
gious liberty. 

The  importance  of  the  Solemn  League  and  Covenant, 
thus  agreed  upon  and  subscribed  by  the  ruling  constitu- 
tional authorities,  civil  and  ecclesiastical,  in  both  Scotland 
and  England,  renders  it  necessary  that  it  should  be  pre- 
sented to  the  reader  in  the  body  of  the  work,  rather  than 
in  an  appendix. 

*'  The  Solemn  League  and  Covenant,  for  reformation  and  defence 
of  religion,  the  honor  and  happiness  of  the  King,  and  the  peace  and 
safety  of  the  three  kingdoms  of  Scothmd,  England  and  Ireland; 
agreed  upon  by  Commissioners  from  the  Parliament  and  Assembly  of 
Divines  in  England,  with  Commissioners  of  the  Convention  of  Estates 
and  General  Assembly  of  the  Church  of  Scotland  ;  approved  by  the 
General  Assembly  of  the  Cliurch  of  Scotland  and  by  both  Houses  of 
Parliament,  and  the  Assembly  of  Divines  in  Enuland,  and  taken  and 
subscribed  by  them  anno  1643  ;  and  thereafter  by  the  said  authority, 
taken  and  subscribed  by  all  ranks  in  Scotland  and  England  the  same 
year;  and  ratified  by  act  of  the  Parliament  of  Scotland  anno  J644. 
(And  again  renewed  in  Scotland,  with  an  acknowledgment  of  sins  and 
engagement  to  duties,  by  all  ranks,  anno  1648,  and  by  Parliament. 


112  HISTORY    OF    THE 

1649;    and  taken  and  subscribed  by  King  Charles  II.,  al  Spey,  June 
23j  1650;    and  at  Scoon,  January  1,  1651.) 

"We,  noblemen,  barons,  knights,  gentlemen,  citizens,  burgesses, 
ministers  of  the  Gospel,  and  commons  of  all  sorts,  in  the  kingdoms  of 
Scotland,  England,  and  Ireland,  by  the  providence  of  God  living  under 
one  king,  and  being  of  one  reformed  religion,  having  before  our  eyes 
the  glory  of  God,  and  the  advancement  of  the  kingdom  of  our  Lord  and 
Saviour  Jesus  Christ,  the  honor  and  happiness  of  the  king's  maje.sty 
and  his  posterity,  and  the  true  public  liberty,  safety,  and  peace  of  Ihe 
kingdom,  wherein  every  one's  private  condition  is  included  :  And 
calling  to  mind  the  treacherous  and  bloody  plots,  conspiracies,  attempis, 
and  practices  of  the  enemies  of  God,  against  the  true  religion  tind 
professors  thereof  in  all  places,  especially  in  these  three  kingdoms,  ever 
since  the  reformation  of  religion;  and  how  much  their  rage,  power,  and 
presumption,  are  of  late,  and  at  this  time,  increased  and  exercised, 
whereof  the  deplorable  state  of  the  Church  and  kingdom  of  Ireland,  the 
distressed  state  of  the  Church  and  kingdom  of  England,  and  the  dan- 
gerous state  of  the  Church  and  kingdom  of  Scotland,  are  present 
and  public  testimones  ;  we  have  now  at  last  (after  other  means  cf 
supplication,  remonstrance,  protestation,  and  sufierings),  for  the  preser- 
vation of  ourselves  and  our  religion  from  utter  ruin  and  destruction, 
according  to  the  commendable  practice  of  these  kingdoms  in  former 
times,  and  the  example  of  God's  people  in  other  nations,  after  mature 
deliberation,  resolved  and  determined  to  enter  into  a  Mutual  and  Sok n,n 
League  and  Covenant,  wherein  we  all  subscribe,  and  each  one  of  us  for 
himself,  with  our  hands  lifted  up  to  the  Most  High  God,  do  swear, — 

"  I.  That  Ave  shall  sincerely,  really  and  constantly,  through  the  grace 
of  God,  endeavor,  in  our  several  places  and  callings,  the  preservation 
of  the  reformed  religion  in  the  "Church  of  Scotland,  in  doctrine,  worship, 
discipline,  and  government,  aga  nst  our  common  enemies;  the  reforma- 
tion of  religion  in  the  kingdoms  of  England  and  Ireland,  in  doctrine, 
worship,  discipline,  and  government,  according  to  the  Word  of  God,  and 
the  example  of  the  best  reformed  Churches  ;  and  shall  endeavor  to  biing 
the  Churches  of  God  in  the  three  kingdoms  to  the  nearest  conjunction 
and  uniformity  in  religion.  Confession  of  Faith,  form  of  Church  govern- 
ment, Directory  for  Worship  and  Catechising;  that  we,  and  our  posterity 
after  us,  may,  as  brethren,  live  in  faith  and  love,  and  the  Lord  may  de- 
light to  dwell  in  the  midst  of  us. 

"  II.  That  we  shall,  in  like  manner,  without  respect  of  persons,  en- 
deavor the  extirpation  of  Popery,  Prelacy  (that  is,  Church  government 
by  archbishops,  bishops,  their  chancellors  and  commissaries,  deans,  deans 
and  chapters,  archdeacons,  and  all  other  ecclesiastical  oflicers  depending 
on  that  hierarchy),  superstition,  heresy,  schism,  profaneness,  and  what- 
soever shall  be  found  contrary  to  sound  doctrine  and  the  power  of  godli- 
ness, lest  we  partake  in  other  men's  sins,  and  thereby  be  in  danger  to 
receive  of  their  plagues;  and  that  the  Lord  may  be  one,  and  his  name 
one,  in  the  three  kingdoms. 

"  III.  We  shall,  with  the  same  sincerity,  reality,  and  constancy,  in  our 
several  vocations,  endeavor,  with  our  estates  and  lives,  mutually  to  pre- 
serve the  rights  and  privileges  of  the  Parliaments,  and  the  liberties  of 
Xhe  kingdoms;  and  to  preserve  and  defend  the  king's  majesty's  person 


WKSTMIiNSTER   ASSEMBLY.  1  13 

anrt  authority,  in  the  preservation  and  (1«  fence  of  the  true  religion  and 
libertiesof  the  kingdoms;  th;U  the  world  in;iy  bear  v/itncss  with  our  con. 
sciences  of  our  loyalty,  and  thai  we  have  no  IhouLrlils  or  intentions  to 
Jiminish  his  majesty's  just  power  and  srreatness, 

"  IV.  We  shall  also,  wit4i  all  faithfulness,  endeavor  the  discovery  of  all 
such  as  have  been  or  shall  be  incendiaries,  malignants,  or  evil  instru- 
ments, by  hindering  the  refoiination  of  religion,  dividing  the  king  from 
his  people,  or  one  of  the  kingdoms  from  another,  or  making  any  faction 
or  parties  among  the  people,  contrary  to  this  League  and  Covenant ;  that 
they  maybe  brought  to  public  trial,  and  receive  condisn  punishment,  as 
the  degree  of  their  olienccs  shall  rcquiie  or  deserve,  or  tlie  supreme  ju- 
dicatories of  both  kingdoms  respectively,  or  others  iiaving  power  from 
them  for  that  elFect,  shall  judge  convenient. 

"  V.  And  whereas  the  happiness  of  a  blessed  peace  between  these 
kingdoms,  denied  in  former  tiiries  to  our  pros^enitors,  is,  by  the  erood 
providence  of  God,  granted  unto  us,  and  hath  been  lately  concluded  and 
settled  by  both  Parliaments;  we  sliall,  each  one  of  us,  according  to  our 
place  and  interest,  endeavor  that  they  may  remain  conjoined  in  a  firm 
peace  and  union  to  all  posterity;  and  that  justice  may  be  done  upon  the 
wilful  opposers  thereof,  in  manner  expressed  in  the  precedent  aiiicle, 

"  VI.  We  shall  also,  according  to  our  places  and  callings,  in  tliis 
common  cause  of  religion,  liberty,  and  peace  of  the  kingdoms,  assist  and 
defend  all  those  that  enter  into  this  League  and  Covenant,  in  the  main- 
taining and  pursuing  thereof;  and  shall  not  suffer  ourselves,  directly  or 
indirectly,  by  whatsoever  combination,  persuasion,  or  terror,  to  be  di- 
vided and  withdrawn  from  this  blessed  union  and  conjunction,  whether 
to  make  defection  to  the  contrary  part,  or  to  aive  oniselvcs  to  a  detes- 
table indiiTerency  or  neutrality  in  this  cause,  which  so  much  concerneth 
the  glory  of  God,  the  good  of  the  kinirdom,  and  honor  of  the  kin<i;  but 
shall,  all  the  days  of  our  lives,  zealously  and  constantly  continue  therein 
against  all  opposition,  and  promote  the  same,  according  to  our  power, 
against  all  letts  and  impediments  whatsoever;  and  what  we  are  not  able 
ourselves  to  suppress  or  overcome,  we  shall  reveal  and  make  known, 
that  it  may  be  timely  prevented  or  removed  :  All  which  we  shall  do  as 
in  the  si-^^ht  of  God. 

"  And,  because  these  kingdoms  are  guilty  of  many  sins  and  provoca- 
tions asrainst  God,  and  his  Son  Jesus  Christ,  as  is  too  manifest  by 
our  present  distresses  and  dangers,  the  fruits  tliereof;  we  profess  and 
declare,  before  God  and  the  world,  our  unfeicned  desire  to  be  humbled 
for  our  own  sins,  and  for  the  sins  of  these  kingdoms;  especially  that  we 
have  not,  as  we  ou^ht,  valued  the  inestimable  benefit  of  the  Gospel ; 
that  we  have  not  labored  for  the  purity  and  power  thereof;  and  that 
we  have  not  endeavored  to  receive  Christ  in  our  hearts,  nor  to  walk 
worthy  of  him  in  our  lives;  which  are  the  causes  of  other  sins  and 
transgressions  so  much  abounding  amongst  us :  and  our  true  and 
unfeigned  purpose,  desire,  and  endeavor,  for  ourselves  and  all  others 
under  our  power  and  charge,  both  in  public  and  private,  in  all  duties  we 
owe  to  God  and  man,  to  amend  our  lives,  and  each  one  to  go  before 
another  in  the  example  of  a  real  reformation  ;  that  the  Lord  may  turn 
away  his  wrath  and  heavy  indignation,  and  establish  these  Churches 
and  kingdoms  in  truth  and  peace.  And  this  Covenant  we  make  in  the 
presence  of  Almightv  God,  the  Searcher   of  all  hearts,  with  a  true 


114  histo];y  of  the 

hitention  to  perlbrm  the  same,  as -v^-^e  shall  answer  al  that  ^'leat  da}\ 
when  the  secrets  of  all  hearts  shall  be  disclosed  ;  most  humbly  beseech- 
ing the  Lord  to  strengthen  us  by  his  Holy  Spirit  for  this  end,  and  to 
bless  our  desires  and  pioceedings  with  such  success,  as  may  be  deliver- 
ance and  safety  to  his  people,  and  encourag«ement  to  other  Christian 
Churches,  groaning  under,  or  in  danger  of  the  yoke  of  anlichristian 
tyranny,  to  join  in  the  same  or  like  association  and  covenant,  to  the 
glory  of  God,  the  enlargement  of  the  kingdom  of  Jksus  Christ,  and  the 
peace  and  tranquillity  of  Christian  kingdoms  and  commonwealths." 

It  is  difficult  to  conceive  how  any  calm,  iinprejadiced, 
thoughtful  and  religious  man  can  peruse  the  preceding  very 
solemn  document,  without  feeling  upon  his  mind  an  over- 
awing sense  of  its  sublimity  and  sacredness.  The  most 
important  of  man's  interests  for  time  and  for  eternity  are 
inckided  within  its  ample  scope,  and  made  the  subjects  of 
a  Solemn  League  with  each  other,  and  a  sacred  Covenant 
with  God.  Religion,  liberty,  and  peace,  are  the  great  ele- 
ments of  human  welfare  to  the  preservation  of  which  it 
bound  the  empire;  and  as  those  by  whom  it  was  framed 
knew  well,  that  there  can  be  no  safety  for  these  in  aland 
where  the  mind  of  the  community  is  dark  with  ignorance, 
warped  by  superstition,  misled  by  error,  and  degraded  by 
tyranny,  civil  and  ecclesiastical,  they  pledged  themselves 
to  seek  the  extirpation  of  these  pernicious  evils.  Yet  it 
was  the  evils  themselves,  and  not  the  persons  of  those  in 
whom  those  evils  prevailed,  that  they. sought  to  extirpate. 
Nor  was  there  any  inconsistency  in  declaring  that  they 
sought  to  promote  the  honor  and  happiness  of  the  king, 
while  thus  uniting  in  a  Covenant  against  that  double  des- 
potism which  he  strove  to  exercise.  For  no  intelligent 
person  will  deny,  that  it  is  immeasurably  more  glorious 
for  a  monarch  to  be  the  king  of  freemen,  than  a  tyrant 
over  slaves ;  and  that  whatsoever  promotes  the  true  men- 
tal, moral,  and  religious  greatness  of  a  kingdom,  promotes 
also  its  civil  welfare,  and  elevates  the  true  dignity  of  its 
sovereign.  This,  the  mind  of  Charles  was  not  comprehen- 
sive enough  to  learn,  nor  wise  enough  to  know,  especially 
as  he  was  misled  by  the  prelat«ic  faction,  who,  while  seek- 
ing their  own  aggrandizement,  led  him  to  believe  that  they 
were  zealous  only  for  his  glory, — a  glory,  the  very  essence 
of  which  was  the  utter  annihilation  of  all  liberty,  civil  and 
religious.  And  as  this  desperate  and  fatal  prelatic  pohcy 
was  well  known  to  the  patriotic  framers  of  the  Solemn 


WKSTMINSTKR    ASSKMnLY.  life 

League  and  Covenant,  they  attached  no  direct  blame  to  the 
king  himself,  but  sought  to  rescue  him  from  the  evil  influ- 
ence of  those  by  whose  pernicious  counsels  lie  was  misled. 
Aware,  also,  iiow  often  the  wisest  and  best  schemes  are 
perverted  and  destroyed  by  the  base  intrigues  of  scltish 
and  designing  men,  the  Covenanters  solemnly  pledged 
themselves  to  each  other  and  to  God,  not  to  sutler  them- 
selves to  be  divided  or  withdrawn  from  the  constant  and 
persevering  prosecution  of  their  great  and  sacred  cause, 
till  its  triumph  should  be  secured,  or  their  own  lives  ter- 
minate. In  this  strong  resolution  v^'ere  involved,  a  lofty 
singleness  of  purpose,  deliberate  determination,  and  not 
only  self-denial,  but,  if  necessary,  self-sacrilice,  that  to  the 
world  a  great  example  might  be  given  for  better  times  to 
follow  and  to  realize. 

Such  were  the  great  principles  of  the  Solemn  League  and 
Covenant  ;  and,  while  it  is  easy,  very  easy,  to  frame  cap- 
tious objections  against  minor  points  and  forms  of  expres- 
sion, as  is  very  often  done,  we  do  not  hesitate  to  say,  that 
in  our  opinion,  no  man  who  is  able  to  understand  its 
nature,  and  to  feel  and  appreciate  its  spirit  and  its  aim, 
will  deny  it  to  be  the  wisest,  the  sublimest,  and  the  most 
sacred  document  ever  framed  by  uninspired  men.  But,  as 
afterwards  appeared,  it  w^as  premature  ;  it  far  outwent  the 
spirit  of  the  time  ;  it  was  understood  and  valued  but  by  few  ; 
and  it  was  regarded  by  all  who  could  not  understand  it  with 
the  most  intense  and  bitter  hatred,  mingled  and  increased 
by  fear.  Let  not,  however,  this  admission  be  taken  in  its 
most  unlimited  sense.  If  the  Solemn  League  and  Covenant 
was  premature,  that  detracts  not  from  its  real  value  ;  it 
only  proves  that  it  was  promulgated  in  ignorant  and  "evil 
times,  with  darkness  and  with  dangers  compassed  round." 
A.nd  let  these  queslions  be  asked  and  thoughtfully  answer- 
ed : — Has  it  perished  amid  the  strife  of  tongues  1  Has  it 
sunk  into  oblivion,  and  ceased  to  be  a  living  element  in  the 
quick  realms  of  thought  1  Are  there  none  by  whom  it  is 
still  regarded  with  sacred  veneration  1  Is  it  not  true,  that, 
at  this  very  moment,  there  are  many  minds  of  great  power 
and  energy,  earnestly  engaged  in  reviving  its  mighty  prin- 
ciples, and  fearlessly  holding  ihem  forth  before  the  world's 
startled  gaze  1  And,  if  such  be  the  case,  may  it  not  be, 
that  what  two  hundred  years  ago  was  premature,  has  now 


116  HISTO.x/    OF    THE 

neariy  reached  the  period  of  a  full  maturity,  and  is  on  the 
point  of  raising  up  its  sacred  and  majestic  head,  "  strong 
in  the  Lord  and  in  the  power  of  his  might." 

Before  proceeding  to  relate  the  discussions  of  the  West- 
minster Assembly  of  Divines,  thus  finally  constituted  and 
prepared  for  its  duties,  it  may  be  expedient  to  give  a  brief 
view  of  the  parties,  by  the  combination  of  v/hieh  it  was 
from  the  first  composed,  by  whose  jarring  contentions  its 
progress  was  retarded,  and  by  whose  divisions  and  mutual 
hostilities  its  labors  were  at  length  frustrated  and  preventei 
from  obtaining  their  due  result. 

When  the  Parliament  issued  the  ordinance  for  calling 
together  an  Assembly  of  Divines  for  consultation  and 
advice,  there  was,  it  will  be  remembered,  actually  no  legal- 
ized form  of  Church  government  in  England,  so  far  as 
depended  on  the  Legislature.  Even  Charles  himself  had 
consented  to  the  bill  removhigthe  prelates  from  the  House 
of  Lords  ;  and  though  the  biUabolisliing  the  hierarchy  had 
not  obtained  the  royal  sanction,  yet  the  greater  part  of  the 
kingdom  regarded  it  as  conclusive  on  that  point.  The 
chief  object  of  the  Parliament,  therefore,  was  to  determine 
what  form  of  Church  government  was  to  be  established  by 
law,  in  the  room  of  that  which  had  been  abolished.  And 
as  their  desire  was  to  secure  a  form  which  should  both  be 
generally  acceptable,  and  should  also  bear,  at  least,  a  close 
resemblance  to  the  form  most  prevalent  in  other  reformed 
Churches,  they  attempted  to  act  impartially,  and,  in  their 
ordinance,  they  selected  some  of  each  denomincKion, 
appointing  Bishops,  untitled  Episcopalians,  Puritans,  and 
Independents.  Several  Episcopalians,  and  at  least  one 
Bishop,  were  present  in  the  first  meeting  of  the  Assembly. 
But  when  the  Solemn  League  and  Covenant  was  proposed 
and  taken,  and  when  the  king  issued  his  condemnation  of 
it,  all  the  decided  Episcopalians  left,  with  the  exception  of 
Dr.  Featly.  He  remained  a  member  of  the  Assembly  for 
some  time  ;  till  being  detected  corresponding  with  Arch- 
bishop Ussher,  and  revealing  the  proceedings  of  the  Assem- 
bly, he  was  cut  off  from  that  venerable  body,  and  committed 
to  prison.*  From  that  time  forward  there  were  no  direct 
supporters  of  Prelacy  in  the  Assembly,  and  the  protracted 
*  Neal,  vol.  ii.  pr .  234,  235. 


WKSTMl.NTjTEli    ASSKMBLV.  1  1*7 

controversial  discussions  wliich  arose  were  on  other  sub- 
jects, on  wliich  account  we  have  nothing  to  do  with  the 
Episcopalian  controversy,  beyond  what  has  been  already 
stated  ill  our  preliminary  pages. 

There  can  be  no  doubt  tliat  the  close  alliance  which  the 
h'nglisl)  Parliunieut  sought  with  Scotland,  and  the  gro\ind 
taken  by  the  Scottish  Convention  of  Estates  and  General 
Assembly,  in  requiring  not  only  an  international  league, 
but  also  a  religious  covenant,  tended  greatly  to  direct  the 
mind  of  the  English  statesmen  and  divines  towards  the 
i'resbyterian  form  of  Church  government,  and  exercised  a 
pov/erful  influence  in  the  deliberations  of  the  Westminster 
Assembly.  But  let  it  be  also  remembered,  that  in  every 
one  of  the  reformed  continental  Churches,  either  the  Pres- 
byterian form,  or  one  very  closely  resembling  it,  had  been 
adopted  ;  and  that  the  Puritans  had  already  formed  them- 
selves into  presbyteries,  held  preshyterial  meetings,  and 
endeavored  to  exercise  Presbyterian  discipline  in  the 
reception,  suspension,  and  rejection  of  members.  Both 
the  example  of  other  Churches,  therefore,  and  their  own 
already  begun  practice,  had  led  them  so  far  onward  to  the 
J^resbyterian  model,  that  they  wonld  almost  inevitably  have 
assumed  it  altogether  apart  from  the  influence  of  Scotland. 
In  truth,  that  influence  was  exerted  and  felt  almost  solely 
in  the  way  of  instruction,  from  a  Church  already  formed, 
to  one  in  the  process  of  formation;  and  none  would  have 
been  more  ready  than  the  Scottish  commissioners  them- 
selves to  have  repudiated  the  very  idea  of  any  other  kind 
of  influence.  It  may  be  said,  therefore,  with  the  most 
strict  propriety,  that  the  native  aim  and  tendency  of  the 
Westminster  Assembly  was  to  establish  the  Presbyterian 
form  of  Church  government  in  England,  the  great  body  of 
English  Puritans  having  gradually  become  Presbyterians. 
There  is  reason  to  believe  that  both  Pym  and  Hampden 
favored  the  Presbyterian  system  ;  but  their  early  and  lam- 
ented death  deprived  that  cause  of  their  powerful  support, 
and  the  House  of  Commons  of  their  able  and  steady  guid- 
ance. The  chief  promoters  of  Presbytery  in  the  House  of 
Commons  were.  Sir  William  "Waller,  Sir  Pliilip  Stapleton, 
Sir  John  Clotworthy,  Sir  Benjamin  Rudyard,  Colonel  Mas- 
sey.  Colonel  Harley,  Serjeant  Maynard,  Denzil  Hollis,  John 
Glynn,  and  a  fev*-  mo^e  of  less  influential  character. 


118  HISTORY    OF    THE 

The  liidependents,  or  Congregationalists,  formed  anothei 
party,  few  in  point  of  number,  but  men  of  considerable 
talent  and  learning,  of  undoubted  piety,  of  great  pertina- 
city in  adhering  to  their  own  opinions,  and,  we  are  con- 
strained to  say,  well  skilled  in  the  artifices  of  intriguing 
policy.  The  origin  of  the  Independent  system  has  been 
already  stated  briefly  in  our  introductory  remarks,  and  will 
require  little  further  elucidation.  It  was,  according  to  the 
statement  of  its  adherents,  a  medium  between  the  Brown- 
ist  and  the  Presbyterian  systems.  They  did  not,  with  the 
Brownists,  condemn  every  other  Church  as  too  corrupt 
and  antichristian  for  intercommunion — for  they  professed 
to  agree  in  doctrine  both  with  the  Church  of  England  in 
its  Articles,  and  with  the  other  reformed  Churches;  but 
they  held  the  entire  power  of  government  to  belong  to  each 
separate  congregation  ;  and  they  practically  admitted  no 
Church  censure  but  admonition — for  that  cannot  properly 
be  called  excommunication  which  consisted  not  in  expel 
ling  from  their  body  an  obstinate  and  impenitent  offender, 
but  in  withdrawing  themselves  from  him.  With  regard  to 
their  boast  of  being  the  first  advocates  of  toleration  and 
liberty  of  conscience,  that  will  come  to  be  examined  here- 
after;  this  only  need  be  said  at  present,  that  toleration  is 
naturally  the  plea  of  the  weaker  party — that  the  term  was 
then,  has  been  since,  and  still  is,  much  misunderstood  and 
misused — and  that  wherever  the  Independents  possessed 
power,  as  in  New  England,  they  showed  themselves  to  be 
as  intolerant  as  any  of  their  opponents. 

The  leading  Independents  in  the  Westminster  Assembly 
were.  Dr.  Thomas  Goodwin,  Philip  Nye,  Jeremiah  Bur 
roughs,  William  Bridge,  and  Sidrach  Simpson.  These  men 
had  at  first  been  silenced  by  the  violent  persecutions  of 
Laud  and  Wren,  and  had  then  retired  to  Holland — where 
they  continued  exercising  their  ministry  among  their  ex- 
patriated countrymen  for  several  years.  Goodwin  and  Nye 
resided  at  Arnheim,  where  they  were  higl  ly  esteemed  for 
their  piety  and  talents.  Bridge  went  to  Rotterdam,  where 
he  became  pastor  of  an  English  congregation,  previously 
formed  by  the  notorious  Hugh  Peters.  Burroughs  went 
also  to  Rotterdam,  and  became  connected  with  a  congre- 
gation then  under  the  pastoral  care  of  Bridge,  in  what  was 
termed    the  different   but    co-ordinate   office    of  teacher 


WESTMINSTER  ASSEMHLY.  119 

Simpson  subsequently  joined  himself  to  the  two  preceding 
brethren,  having,  accordinfr-  to  their  system,  given  an 
account  of  his  faith.  But  thoug-h  at  first  highly  aj)provii)o 
the  order  of  the  church  under  the  care  of  Mr.  Bridge,  he 
suDsequently  proposed  some  alterations  which  would,  as 
he  thought,  promote  its  welfare — particularly  the  revival 
of  the  prophecyings  used  by  the  old  Puritans.  This  Mr. 
Bridge  opposed,  and  Mr.  Simpson  withdrew  from  com- 
munion with  him,  and  formed  a  church  for  himself.*  The 
quarrel,  however,  did  not  so  terminate.  Mr.  Ward,  an- 
other ejected  Puritan,  having  about  the  same  time  retired 
to  Holland,  came  to  Rotterdam,  and  having  joined  Mr. 
Bridge's  church,  was  appointed  his  colleague  in  the  pasto- 
ral office.  He,  too,  wished  for  additional  improvements; 
and  as  he  did  not  retire,  like  Simpson,  but  continued  the 
struggle,  Bridge  thought  it  necessary  to  depose  him  from 
the  ministry — which  his  sujierior  influence  in  the  congre- 
gation enabled  him  to  accomplish-  To  prevent  the  evil 
consequences  which  might  have  resulted  from  these  un- 
happy divisions,  Goodwin  and  Nye  came  from  Arnheim, 
instituted  an  investigation  of  the  wdiole  matter,  and  induced 
the  two  contending  brethren  and  their  adherents  to  ac- 
knowledge their  mutual  fault>:,  and  to  be  reconciled.!  The 
reconciliation,  however,  appears  to  have  been  but  superfi 
cial,  and  to  have  required  the  interposition  of  the  mairis- 
tracy  ere  it  could  be  even  plausibly  efTected.  Such  divi- 
sions might  have  caused  these  divines  to  entertain  some 
suspicion  that  the  model  of  Church  government  which  they 
had  adopted  was  not  altogether  so  perfect  as  they  wished 
it  to  be  thought ;  but  so  far  as  their  subsequent  conduct, 
as  members  of  the  Westminster  Assembly,  is  concerned, 
this  does  not  seem  to  have  been  the  case  in  even  the 
slightest  degree.  When  the  contest  between  the  King  and 
the  Parliament  had  become  so  extreme  that  the  Parliament 
declared  its  own  continuation  as  permanent  as  it  might 
itself  think  necessary,  and  began  to  threaten  the  abolition 
of  the  whole  prelatic  hierarchy,  the  above-named  five  Inde- 
pendent divines  returned  to  England,  prepared  to  assist  in 
the  long-sought  reformation  of  religion,  and  to  avail  them- 

*  Brook's  Lives  of  the  Puritans,  vol.  iii.  p.  312. 

t  Brook,  vol.  ii.  p.  454;  Edwards'  Autorologia,    pp.  115-117;    Bail- 
lie's  Dissuasive,  pp.  75-77. 


120  HISTORY    OF    THE 

selves  of  every  opportunity  which  might  occur  to  promote 
their  favorite  system.  And  admitting  them  to  be  conscien- 
tiously convinced  of  its  superior  excellency,  they  deserve 
no  censure  for  desiring  to  see  it  universally  received.  In 
every  such  case,  all  that  can  be  wished  is,  that  each  party 
should  prosecute  its  purpose  honorably  and  openly,  in  the 
fair  field  of  frank  and  manly  argument,  with  Christian  can- 
dor  and  integrity ;  and  not  by  factious  opposition,  or 
with  the  dark  and  insidious  craft  too  characteristic  of 
worldly  politicians. 

Of  these  five  leading  Independents,  often  termed  "  The 
Five  Dissenting  Brethren,"  Goodwin  appears  to  have  been 
the  deepest  theologian,  and  perhaps  altogether  the  ablest 
man  ;  Nye,  the  most  acute  and  subtle,  and  the  best  skilled 
in  holding  intercourse  with  worldly  politiciiins  ;  Burroughs, 
the  most  gentle  and  pacific  in  temper  and  character  ;  Bridge 
is  said  to  have  been  a  man  of  considerable  attainments,  and 
a  very  laborious  student ;  and  Simpson  bears  also  a  respec- 
table character  as  a  preacher,  though  not  peculiarly  distin- 
guished in  public  debate.  To  these  Baillie  adds,  as  Inde- 
pendents, Joseph  Caryl,  William  Carter  (of  London),  John 
Philips,  and  Peter  Sterry,—  naming  nine,  but  saying  that 
there  were  ''  some  ten  or  eleven."*  Neal  adds  Anthony 
Burges,  and  William  Greenhill.f  Some  of  the  views  of 
the  Independents  were  occasionally  supported  by  Herle, 
Marshall,  and  Vines,  and  some  few  others ;  but  none  of 
these  men  are  to  be  included  in  the  number  of  the  decided 
Independents. 

The  third  party  in  the  Assembly  were  the  Erastians;  so 
called  from  Erastus,  a  physician  at  Heidelberg,  who  wrote 
on  the  subject  of  Church  government,  especially  in  respect 
of  excommunication,  in  the  year  1568.  His  theory  was, — 
That  the  pastoral  office  is  only  persuasive,  like  that  of  a 
professor  over  his  students,  without  any  direct  power  j  that 
baptism,  the  Lord's  supper,  and  all  other  Gospel  ordinan- 
ces, were  free  and  open  to  all ;  and  that  the  minister  might 
state  and  explain  what  were  the  proper  qualifications,  and 
n)ight  dissuade  the  vicious  and  unqualified  from  the  com- 
munion, but  had  no  power  to  refuse  it,  or  to  inflict  any 
kind  of  censure.  The  punishment  of  all  offences,  whether 
oi'  a  civil  or  a  religious  nature,  belonged,  according  to  this 
•  Bnillip,  vol.  ii.  p.  1 10.  f  Neal,  vol.  ii.  pp.  275,  360. 


^VESTMI^STER    ASSEMBLY.  12J 

theory,  exclusively  to  the  civil  magistrate.  The  tendency 
of  this  theory  was,  to  destroy  entirely  all  ecclesiastical  and 
spiritual  jurisdiction,  to  deprive  the  Church  of  all  power  of 
government,  and  to  make  it  completely  the  mere  "  creature 
of  the  State."  The  pretended  advantage  of  this  theory  was, 
ihat  it  pre\entcd  the  existence  of  an  imperium  in  imperio^  or 
«!ie  government  within  another,  of  a  distinct  and  indepen- 
dent nature.  But  the  real  disadvantage,  in  the  most  miti- 
gated view  that  can  be  taken,  was,  that  it  reproduced  what 
may  be  termed  a  civil.  Popery,  by  combining  civil  and 
ecclesiastical  jurisdiction,  and  giving  both  into  the  posses- 
sion of  one  irresponsible  power,— thereby  destroying  both 
civil  and  religious  liberty,  and  subjecting  men  to  an  abso- 
lute and  irremediable  despotism.  In  another  point  of  view, 
t!ie  Erastian  theory  assumes  a  still  darker  and  more  formi- 
dable aspect.  It  necessarily  denies  the  mediatorial  sove- 
reignty of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  over  his  Church, — takes 
the  power  of  the  keys  from  his  office-bearers  and  gives 
tl.em  to  the  civil  magistrate, — destroys  liberty  of  con- 
science, by  making  spiritual  matters  subject  to  the  same 
coercive  power  as  temporal  affairs  naturally  and  properly 
are  ;  and  thus  involves  both  State  and  Church  in  reciprocal 
and  mutually  destructive  sin,  -  the  State,  in  usurping  a 
power  which  God  has  not  given  ;  and  the  Church,  in  yield- 
ing what  she  is  not  at  liberty  to  yield  — the  sacred  crown- 
rights  of  the  divine  Redeemer,  her  only  Head  and  King. 

But  as  the  Erastian  controversy  will  come  fully  before 
us  in  the  debates  of  the  Assembly,  it  is  unnecessary  to 
enter  upon  it  here.  There  were  only  two  divines  in  the 
Assembly  who  advocated  the  Erastian  theory  ;  and  of 
these,  one  alone  v.as  decidedly  and  thoroughly  Erastian. 
The  divine  to  whom  this  unenviable  pre-eminence  must  be 
assigned,  was  Thomas  Coleman,  minister  at  Bliton  in  Lin- 
colnshire. He  was  aided  generally,  but  not  always,  by 
Liglitfoot,  in  the  various  discussions  that  arose  involving 
Erastian  opinions.  Both  of  these  divines  were  eminently 
distinguished  by  their  attainments  in  Oriental  literature, 
particularly  in  rabbinical  lore ;  and  their  attachment  to 
the  study  of  Hebrew  literature  and  customs  led  them  to 
the  conclusion,  that  the  Christian  Church  was  to  be  in 
every  respect  constituted  according  to  the  model  of  the 
Jewish  Church  :  and  having  formed  the  opinion  that  theio 
11 


122  HISTORY    OF    THE 

was  but  one  jurisdiction  in  Israel,  combining  both  civi 
and  ecclesiastical,  and  that  this  was  held  by  the  Hebrew 
monarchs,  they  concluded  that  the  same  blended  govern- 
ment ought  to  prevail  under  the  Christian  dispensation 
Of  the  lay  assessors  in  the  Assembly  the  chief  Erastians 
were,  the  learned  Selden,  Mr.  Whitelocke,  and  Mr.  St. 
John  ;  but  though  Selden  was  the  only  one  of  them  whose 
arguments  were  influential  in  the  Assembly  itself,  yet 
nearly  all  the  Parliament  held  sentiments  decidedly  Eras- 
tian,  and  having  seized  the  power  of  Church  government, 
were  not  disposed  to  yield  it  up,  be  the  opinion  of  the  as- 
sembled divines  what  it  might.  Hence,  though  the  Eras- 
tian  divines  were  only  two,  yet  their  opinions,  supported 
by  the  whole  civil  authority  in  the  kingdom,  were  almost 
sure  to  triumph  in  the  end.  This,  in  one  point  of  view, 
was  not  strange.  The  kingdom  had  suffered  so  much  se- 
vere and  protracted  injury  from  the  usurped  authority  and 
power  of  the  prelates,  that  the  assertors  of  civil  liberty 
almost  instinctively  shrunk  from  even  the  shadow  of  any 
kind  of  power  in  the  hands  of  ecclesiastics.  A  little  less 
passion  and  fear,  and  a  little  more  judgment  and  discrimi- 
nation, might  have  rescued  them  from  this  groundless  ap- 
prehension ;  and  they  might  have  perceived  that  freedom, 
both  civil  and  ecclesiastical,  would  be  best  secured  by  the 
full  and  authoritative  recognition  of  their  respective  juris- 
dictions, separate  and  independent.  But  indeed  this  is  a 
truth  which  has  yet  to  be  learned  by  civil  governments, — 
a  truth  unknown  to  ancient  times,  in  which  religion  was 
either  an  engine  of  the  State  or  the  object  of  persecution, 
— a  truth  unknown  during  the  period  of  papal  ascendency, 
in  which  the  Romish  priesthood  usurped  dominion  over 
civil  governments,  and  exercised  its  tyranny  alike  over  the 
persons  and  the  conscience  of  mankind, — a  truth  first 
brought  to  light  in  the  great  religious  reformation  of  the 
sixteenth  century, — but  not  then,  nor  even  yet,  fully  de- 
velo}  ed,  rightly  understood,  and  permitted  to  exercise  its 
free  and  sacred  supremacy.  That  it  will  finally  assume  its 
due  dominion  over  the  minds  and  actions  of  all  bodies  of 
men,  both  civil  and  ecclesiastical,  we  cannot  doubt  ;  and 
then,  but  not  till  then,  will  the  two  dread  counterpart  ele- 
ments of  human  degradation,  tyranny  and  slavery,  become 
alike  impossible. 


■^VESTIMIASTKIl   ASSE-AlDLy.  123 

Into  these  three  great  parties,  Presbyterian,  Independent, 
and  P>astinn,  was   the   Westminster  Assembly  of  Divines 
divided,  even  when  Hrst  it  met;  and  it  was'inevitable  that 
a  contest  should  be  waged  among  them  for  the  ascendency, 
ending  most  probably  either   in  increased  hostility  and  ab- 
sohite  disruption,  or  in  some  mutual  compromise,  to  which 
all  might  assent,  though  perhaps  with  the  cordial  approba- 
tion of  none.    The  strength  of  these  parties  was  more  evenly 
balanced  at  first  than  might  have  been  expected.     The  l*u 
riians,  though  all  of  them  had  received  episcopal  ordination, 
and  had    been    exercising  their  ministry  in  the  Church  of 
England,  under  the  hierarchy,  were  nearly  all  Presbyterians, 
or  at  least  quite  willing  to  adopt  that  form  of  Church  gov- 
ernment, though  many  of  them  would  have  consented  to  a 
modified  Episcopacy  on   the   Usserian  model.     Their  in- 
fluence in  the  city  of  London  was  paramount,  and  through- 
out the  country  was  very  considerable  ;  and  as  they  formed 
the  most  natural  connecting  link  with  Scotland,  they  occu- 
pied a  position  of  very  great    importance.     Although   the 
Independents  were  but  a  small  minority  in  the  Assembl}', 
yet  various  circumstances  combined  to  render  them  by  no 
means  a  weak  or  insignifi<:ant  party.    They  were  supported 
in  the  House  of  Peers  by  Lord  Say  and  Sele,  and  frequently 
also  by  Lords  Brooke  and  Kimbolton, — the  latter  of  wliom 
is  better  known  by  his  subsequent  title  of  Lord  Manches- 
ter.   Philip  Nye,  one  of  the  leading  Independents,  had  been 
appointed  to  Kimbolton  by  the  influence  of  Lord  Kimbol- 
ton, and  continued  to  maintain  a  constant  intercourse  with 
him,  both  while   he  was   acting  as  a  legislator,  and  when 
leading  the  armies  of  the  Parliament.     It  is  even  asserted 
by  Palmer,  in  his  "  Non-Conformist's  Memorial,"  that  Nye's 
advice  was  sought  and  followed  in  the  nomination  of  the 
divines  who   were  called  to   the  Assembly.*     And  when, 
further,  it  is  borne  in  mind  that  Oliver  Cromwell  was  an 
Independent,  and  acted  as  lieutenant-general  under  Lord 
Manchester,  it  will  easily  be  perceived  that   Nye's  inter- 
course with  the  army  was  direct  and   influential,  and  that 
thus  the  Five  Dissenting  Brethren  were  able  to  employ  a 
mighty  political  influence      Nor  can  the  Erastian  party  be 
justly  termed  feeble,  though  formed  by  not  more  than  two 
"Jivines,  and  a  few  of  the  lay^  assessors,  who  were  not  al' 
•  Pahnei's  Non-Confonnist's  Memoriab  V')l.  i.  p.  96. 


I'li  HISTORY    OF    THE 

ways  present ;  for  both  Coleman  and  Lightfoot  were  influ 
ential  men,  on  account  of  their  reputalion  for  learning,  in 
which  they  were  scarcely  inferior  to  Selden  himself,  in  the 
department  of  Hebrew  literature.  So  high  was  Selden's 
fame,  that  any  cause  might  be  deemed  strong  which  he 
supported ;  and  Whitelocke  and  St.  John  possessed  so 
ni'ich  political  influence  in  Parliament  that  they  could  not 
fail  to  exercise  great  power  in  every  matter  which  they 
promoted  or  opposed.  But  the  main  strength  of  the  Eras- 
tian  theory  consisted  in  the  combination  of  three  potent 
elements, — the  natural  love  of  holding  and  exercising  pow- 
er, which  is  common  to  ail  men  and  parties,  tending  to 
render  the  Parliament  reluctant  to  relinquish  that  ecclesi 
dstical  supremacy  which  they  had  with  such  difficulty 
wrested  from  the  sovereign  ;  their  want  of  acquaintance 
with  the  true  nature  of  Presbyterian  Church  government, 
which  led  them  to  dread  that  if  allowed  free  scope  it  might 
prove  as  oppressive  as  even  the  Prelatical,  beneath  whose 
weighty  and  galling  yoke  the  nation  was  still  down-bent 
andbleeding  ;  and  the  strong  instinctive  antipathy  which 
fallen  human  nature  feels  against  the  spirituality  and  the 
power  of  vital  godliness.  It  is  easy  to  perceive,  that  the 
theory  which  was  supported  by  these  three  elements  in  tho- 
rough and  vigorous  union,  was  one  which  it  would  be  no 
easy  matter  to  encounter  and  defeat ;  or  rather,  was  one 
over  which  nothing  but  divine  power  could  possibly  gain 
the  victory. 

The  Scottish  commissioners  cannot   with  propriety  be 
regarded   as   forming  a  party  in  the  W^estminster  Assem- 
bly, as  they   and   the  English    Presbyterians  were   in  all 
important  matters  completely  identified.     Still  it  may  be 
expedient  to  give  a  very  brief  account   of  men  who  occu- 
pied a  position  so  important,  and   exercised  for  a  time  so 
great  an  influence  on  the  affairs  of  both  kingdoms.     Their 
names  have  been  already   mentioned  ;  and  it  has  also  been 
stated,  that  neither  the  Earl  of  Cassilis,  p  Jr  the  Rev.  Rob- 
ert  Douglas,   ever  attended    the   Westminster    Assembly. 
Lord  Maitland,  and  Archibald  Johnston  of  Warriston,  gave 
regular  attendance,  and  took  deep  interest  in  the  proceed- 
ings.    At   that  time  Lord  Maitland  appeared  to  be  very 
zealous  in   the   cause   of  religious  reformation,  and  a  tho- 
rough Presbyterian  ;  but,  as  afterwards  appeared,  his  zeal 


WRST^riNSTRR     ASSF,3<1!LV.  12fi 

was  more  of  a  political  than  of  a  relifrioiis  character.  ..i- 
ter  the  restoration  of  Clmrles  II.,  he  conformed  to  Pre  i.cy, 
became  the  chief  adviser  of  that  monarch  in  Scottish 
aflairs,  received  the  title  of  Duke  of  Lauderdale,  and  is 
too  well  known  in  Scottish  history  as  a  ruthless  and  bloody 
perseciitin".  Johnston  of  Warristou  was  in  heart  and  soul 
a  Covenanter  on  religious,  not  political  principles,  from 
which  he  never  sv*^erved.  One  only  stain  appears  in  his 
life,  if  stain  it  can  be  called, — his  consenting  to  receive 
office  under  the  government  of  Cromwell,  after  that  remark- 
able man  had  reduced  the  three  kingdoms  to  his  sway,  and 
v.hen  there  was  every  reason  to  expect  that  his  dominion 
would  he  lasting.  Such  being  the  case,  Warriston  had  but 
to  choose  to  serve  his  country  under  Cromwell,  or  not  to 
serve  it  at  all, — he  chose  the  former  alternative  ;  and  after 
the  Restoration,  was  constrained  to  flee  from  Scotland  to 
escape  the  mean  vindictive  hostility  of  the  king.  Having 
been  at  length  seized  by  his  pursuers,  he  was  dragged  back 
to  his  native  country,  that  his  enem.ies  might  sajiate  their 
malice  by  murdering  the  inch  of  life  that  existed  in  his 
aged  and  feeble  form.  He  was  a  man  of  great  strength 
and  clearness  of  intellect,  fervidly  eloquent  in  speech,  and 
of  inflexible  integrity. 

The  four  Scottish  divines  were  in  every  respect  distin- 
guished men,  and  would  have  been  so  regarded  in  any  age 
or   country%     Alexander  Henderson   was,  however,  cheer- 
fiiUy  admitted  to  be  beyond  comparison  the  most  eminent. 
His  learning  was  extensive  rather  than  minute,  correspond- 
ing to  the  character  of  his  mind,  of  which  the  distinguish- 
inor  elements  were  dignity  and  comprehensiveness.     AVhcn 
called    to   quit   the   calm   seclusion    of  the  country  parish 
where  he  had   spent   so  many  years,  and   to   come   to  the 
rescue  of  the  Church  of  Scotland  in  her  hour  of  need,  he  at 
once  proved  himself  able  to  conduct  and  control  the  com- 
plicated movements  of  an  awakening  empire.     Statesmen 
sought  his  counsel ;  but  with  equal  propriety  and  disinter- 
estedness   he   refused  to   concern  himself  Avith    anything 
beyond   what   belonged   to  the  Church,  although  the  very 
reverse  has  often  been  asserted  by  his  prelatic  calumniat- 
ors.   Though  long  and  incessantly  engaged  in  the  most  stir 
rino"  events  of  a  remarkably  momentous  period, his  actions, 
his  writings,  his  speeches,  are   all  characterized   by  calm* 
11 


126  HISTORY    OF    THE 

ness  and  ease,  without  the  slightest  appearance  of  heat  oi 
agitation, — resulting  unquestionably  from  that  aspect  of 
character  generally  termed  greatness  of  mind  ;  but  which 
would  in  him  be  more  properly  characterized  by  describ- 
ing it  as  a  rare  combination  of  intellectual  power,  moral 
dignity,  and  spiritual  elevation.  It  was  the  condition  of  a 
mighty  mind,  enjoying  the  peace  of  God  which  passeth 
understanding,  a  peace  which  the  world  had  not  given  and 
could  not  take  away. 

George  Gillespie  was  one  of  that  peculiar  class  of  men 
who  start  like  meteors  into  sudden  splendor,  shine  with 
dazzling  brilliancy,  then  suddenly  set  behind  the  tomb, 
leaving  their  compeers  equally  to  admire  and  to  deplore. 
When  but  in  his  twenty-fifth  year,  he  published  a  book 
against  what  he  termed  the  "English  Popish  Ceremonies," 
which  Charles  and  Laud  were  attempting  to  force  upon 
the  Church  of  Scotland.  This  work,  though  the  produc- 
tion of  a  youth,  displayed  an  amount  and  accuracy  of  learn- 
ing which  would  have  done  honor  to  any  man  of  the  most 
mature  years  and  scholarship.  In  the  Assembly  of  Divines, 
though  much  the  youngest  member  there,  he  proved  him- 
self one  of  the  most  able  and  ready  debaters,  encountering 
not  only  on  equal  terms,  but  often  with  triumphant  success, 
each  with  his  own  weapons,  the  most  learned,  subtle,  and 
profound  of  his  antagonists.  He  must  have  been  no  com- 
mon man  who  was  ready  on  any  emergency  to  meet,  and 
frequently  to  foil  by  their  own  acknowledgment,  such  men 
as  Selden,  Lightfoot,  and  Coleman,  in  the  Erastian  contro- 
versy, and  Goodwin  and  Nye  in  their  argument  for  Inde- 
pendency. But  the  excessive  activity  of  his  ardent  and 
energetic  mind  wore  out  his  frame  ;  and  he  returned  from 
his  labors  in  the  Westminster  Assembly,  to  see  once  more 
the  Church  and  the  land  of  his  fathers,  and  to  di^. 

Samuel  Rutherford  gained,  and  still  holds,  an  extensive 
reputation  by  his  religious  works ;  but  he  was  not  less 
eminent  in  his  own  day  as  an  acute  and  able  controversial- 
ist. The  characteristics  of  his  mind  were,  clearness  of 
intellect,  warmth  and  earnestness  of  affection,  and  lofti- 
ness and  spirituality  of  devotional  feeling.  He  could  and 
did  write  vigorously  against  the  Independent  system,  and 
at  the  same  time,  love  and  esteem  the  men  who  held  it  In 
his  celebrated  work,  "  Lex  Rex,"  he  not  only  entered  the 


WKST.^IINSTER    ASSEMHLY.  127 

regions  of  consiitutional  jurists,  but  even  produced  a  trea- 
tise unrivalled  yet  as  an  exposition  of  the  true  principles 
of  civil  and  relifrious  liberty.  His  '' Relifrious  Letters" 
have  been  long  admired  by  all  who  could  understand  and 
feel  what  true  religion  is,  though  grovelling  and  impure 
minds  have  striven  to  blight  their  reputation  by  dwelling 
on  occasional  forms  of  expression,  not  necessarily  unseem- 
ly in  the  homeliness  of  phrase  used  in  familiar  letters, 
and  conveying  nothing  offensive  according  to  the  language 
of  the  times.  His  powers  of  debate  were  very  considera-' 
ble,  being  characterized  by  clearness  of  distinction  instat- 
ing his  opinions,  and  a  close  syllogistic  style  of  reasoning, 
both  the  result  of  his  remarkable  precision  of  thought. 

Robert  Baillie,  so  well  known  by  his  "  Letters  and  Jour- 
nals," was  a  man  of  extensive  and  varied  learning,  both  in 
languages  and  in  systematic  theology.  He  rarely  mingled 
in  debate  ;  but  his  sagacity  was  valuable  in  deliberation, 
and  his  oreat  acquirements,  studious  habits,  and  ready  use 
of  his  pen,  rendered  him  an  important  member  of  such  an 
Assembly.  The  singular  ease  and  readiness  of  Baillie  in 
composition,  enabled  him  to  maintain  what  seems  like  a 
universal  correspondence  ;  and  at  the  same  time  to  present 
in  a  vivid,  picturesque,  and  exqiiisitely  natural  style,  the 
very  form  and  impress  of  the  period  in  which  he  lived,  and 
the  great  events  in  which  he  bore  a  part.  And  when  it 
was  necessary  to  refute  errors  by  exhibiting  them  in  their 
real  aspect,  the  vast  reading  and  retentive  memory  of 
Baillie  <  nabled  him  to  produce  what  was  needed  with  mar- 
vellous rapidity  and  correctness.  Scarcely  ever  was  any 
man  rriore  qualified  to  "  catch  the  manners  living  as  they 
rise,"  and  at  the  same  time  to  point  out  with  instinctive 
sagacity  what  in  them  was  wrong  and  dangerous. 

Such  were  the  Scottish  commissioners;  and  it  may 
easily  be  believed  that  they  acted  a  very  important  and  in- 
fluential part  in  the  Westminster  Assembly  of  Divines. 

But  there  was  another  party  in  England,  though  not  re- 
presented in  the  Westminster  Assembly,  which  exercised 
a  commanding  influence  in  the  afil\irs  of  that  momentous 
period.  Perhaps  it  is  not  strictly  correct  to  call  that  a 
party  which  was  rather  a  vast  mass  of  heterogeneous  ele- 
ments, without  any  principle  of  mutual  coherence,  except 
that  of  united  resistance  and   hostility  to  everything  that 


128  KISTORY    OF    THE 

possessed  a  previous  and  authorized  existence.  But  the 
effect  on  the  country  was  even  more  powerful  for  evil  than 
it  could  have  been,  had  the  numerous  sects  to  whom,  we 
are  referring  been  organized  into  a  party  ;  for  in  that  case 
their  strength  could  have  been  estimated,  their  demands 
brought  forward  in  a  definite  form,  what  was  right  and 
reasonable  granted,  and  what  was  manifestly  wrong  and 
unreasonable  detected  and  exposed.  Even  before  the 
meeting  of  the  Long  Parliament,  there  had  sprung  up  a 
great  nlimber  of  seels,  holding  all  various  shades  of  opi- 
nion in  religious  matters,  from  such  as  were  simply  absurd, 
down  to  those  that  were  licentiously  wild  and  daringly 
blasphemous.  It  is  almost  impossible  even  to  enumerate 
the  Sectarians  that  rushed  prominently  into  public  mani- 
festation, when  the  overthrow  of  the  prelatic  hierarchy 
and  government  rendered  it  safe  for  them  to  appear  ;  and 
it  would  be  Avrong  to  pollute  our  pages  w^ith  a  statement 
of  their  pernicious  and  horrible  tenets.*  These  may  be 
seen  at  large  in  Baillie's  "  Dissuasive  from  the  Errors  of 
the  Times,"  "  Edwards's  Gangraena,"  "A  Testimony  to  the 
Truth  of  Jesus  Christ"  by  the  London  ministers,  and  other 
similar  works  by  Prynne,  Bastwick  and  others. 

The  question  may  be  fairly  and  properly  asked,  how  it 
happened  that  so  many  strange  and  dangerous  sects  ap- 
peared  at  that  peculiar  juncture  1  Prelatic  writers  have 
been  in  the  habit  of  asserting  that  it  was  in  consequence 
of  the  overthrow  of  the  Prelatic  Church  government,  \yhen 
people  were  left  to  follow  the  vagaries  of  their  owm  unguided 
imagination,  by  w4iich  they\vere  led  into  all  the  errors  of 
enthusiastic  frenzy  and  fanatical  darkness.  But  this  solu- 
tion does  not  touch  the  essence  of  the  inquiry  :  How  came 
men  to  be  so  prone  to  follow  these  insane  and  dangerous 
errors  1  In  answer  to  this  question  there  are  at  least  two 
points  to  be  carefully  considered  — how  had  Prelacy  gov- 
erned, and  how  had  Prelacy  tavght,  the  people  of  England  % 
It  has  been  already  shown,  that  from  the  very  commence- 

*  "  John  Lillburn  related  it  unto  me,  and  that  in  the  presence  of 
others,  that  returning  from  the  wars  to  London,  he  mei  forty  new  sects, 
many  of  them  dangerous  ones,  and  some  so  pernicious,  that  howsoever, 
as  he  said,  he  was  in  his  judgment  for  toleration  of  all  religions,  yet  he 
professed  he  could  scarce  keep  his  hands  off  them,  so  blasphemous  they 
were  in  their  opinions." — Baslwick^s  Second  Part  of  Ijidependency,  lost 
script,  p.  37.     Lillburn  was  himself  a  Leveller. 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBLY.  129 

entrnt  of  the  Reformation  in  England,  the  principle  of  the 
king's  supremacy  in  matters  ecclesiastical— a  principle 
essentially  despotic  by  its  combination  of  civil  and  spirit- 
ual jurisdiction — had  been  the  governing  principle  in  the 
English  Church.  At  first  it  showed  its  tyrannical  tendency 
by  imposing  ceremonies  not  warranted  by  the  Word  of 
God  and  associated  with  Popery,  and  by  enforcing  these 
without  the  slightest  regard  to  tenderness  of  feeling,  or 
liberty  of  conscience.  Advancing  on  its  despotic  career, 
it  interfered  with  the  forms  and  the  language  of  worship, 
prescribing  to  man  after  what  manner,  and  in  what  terms, 
he  was  to  address  his  Creator,  without  regard  to  that 
Creator's  own  commands.  At  length  it  reached  its  extreme 
limits,  and  presumed  to  exercise  absolute  control  over  the 
doctrines  which  Christ's  ambassadors  were  to  teach,  thus 
rashly  interfering  not  merely  with  man's  approach  to  God, 
but  also  with  God's  message  to  man.  This  extreme  point 
of  spiritual  despotism  was  reached,  when  the  king  and  his 
prelates  authoritatively  commanded  the  Lord's  day  to  be 
vifdated,  and  forbade  any  other  but  the  Arminian  system  of 
doctrine  to  be  preached.  Hence  it  appears,  that  Prelatic 
Church  government  had  proved  itself  to  be  a  complete  and 
oppressive  despotism,  increasing  in  severity  as  it  increased 
in  power.  And  let  it  be  observed,  that  during  its  progress 
it  liad  silenced  or  ejected  great  numbers  of  the  ablest  and 
best  ministers  throughout  the  kingdom,  without  scruple 
and  without  mercy.  Such  a  course  of  tyranny  could  not 
fail  to  produce  a  strong  reaction  in  a  high-minded  people 
like  the  English,  causing  them,  in  the  violence  of  the  re- 
vulsion and  recoil,  to  regard  every  form  of  ecclesiastical 
government  as  inevitably  tyrannical,  just  as  the  extreme  of 
civil  despotism  tends  to  throw  a  nation  at  one  bound  into 
the  extreme  of  republicanism.  In  this  manner  prelatic 
tyranny  was  the  very  cause  why  so  many  sects  sprung  up, 
repudiating  every  kind  of  ecclesiastical  government. 

Afjain,  with  regard  to  how  Prelacy  had  taught  the  people 
of  England,  there  needs  but  little  to  be  said.  For  it  is  a 
melancholy  truth,  that  teachvig  the  peo/)/e  seems  never  to 
have  been  regarded  by  the  Church  oi^  England  as  necessa- 
rily any  part  of  its  duty.  In  a  Church  where  a  despotic 
monarch  exercises  the  supremacy,  this  is  not  surprising  ; 
for  it  requires  no  great  degree  of  penetration  to  perceivo 


130  HISTORY   OF  THE 

that  an  intelligent  and  truly  religious  people  cannot  be 
enslaved.  This  Elizabeth  well  knew,  and  therefore  she  dis- 
approved  of  preaching  ministers.  For  the  same  reason, 
what  were  termed  "  prophecyings,"  or  meetings  for  mutual 
instruction,  and  also  lecturings,  were  prohibited.  And  per- 
haps it  would  not  be  far  from  the  truth  were  we  to  conjec- 
ture, that  the  reason  why  parochial  schools  were  never 
instituted  in  England,  is  to  be  found  in  the  same  despotic 
principle  which  led  the  English  kings  and  Church  to  v/ish 
the  people  to  remain  ignorant,  that  they  might  be  the 
easier  kept  in  a  state  of  blind  subjection.  It  will  be  remem- 
bered also,  that  whenever  the  Puritan  ministers  became 
what  was  thousfht  troublesome  in  their  endeavors  to  teach 
their  poor  and  ignorant  countrymen,  they  were  immediately 
silenced ;  and  as  toleration  was  then  unknown,  they  w^ere 
compelled  to  desist  from  their  hallowed  labors,  on  pain  of 
iniprisonment,  exile,  or  death.  Taking  this  view,  which  is 
the  true  one,  it  is  mere  mockery  to  say  that  Prelacy  had 
ever  even  attempted  to  teitch  the  people  of  England  at  all, 
— unless,  indeed,  we  were  to  say  that  it  had  striven  earn- 
estly to  teach  them,  that  external  rites  and  ceremonies  of 
man's  institution  are  more  important  than  the  word  of  God, 
and  that  it  was  right  to  profane  that  day  w^hich  God  has 
commanded  to  be  remembered  and  kept  holy. 

Such  had  been  the  governing^  and  such  the  teaching  of 
Prelacy  in  England ;  and  it  Avas  not  strange  that  men, 
groaning  under  oppression,  and  kept  in  utter  darkness, 
should  wrench  asunder  their  fetters  furiously,  and  should 
be  dazzled  when  they  rushed  at  once  into  unwonted  light. 
It  was  not  strange  that  they  should  hastily  conclude  that 
whatever  was  remotest  from  such  a  system  was  best ;  and 
should  therefore  be  eager  to  destroy  that  form  of  ecclesi- 
astical government,  and  to  resist  the  establishment  of  any 
other,  lest  it  should  prove  equally  despotic.  Nor  w^as  it 
strange,  that  people  strongly  excited  on  the  subject  of 
religion,  and  uninstructed  in  its  great  leading  truths  and 
principles,  should  very  readily  adopt  any  and  ev^ery  theory 
which  was  boldly  and  plausibly  promulgated.  Thus  it  was 
easy  for  any  man  who  possessed  sufficient  fluency  of  speech 
to  impose  upon  an  excited  and  ignorant  people,  to  gain  a 
number  of  adherents  to  his  opinions,  and  to  become  the 
founder  and    eader  of  a  sect.     It  has  often  been  said  by 


WESTMI.NSTKU    y\SSnMHI.Y.  131 

those  who  support  Prelacy,  not  as  of  divine  authority,  but 
as  a  useful  and  suitable  form  of  Church  government,  that 
it  was  devised  for  the  purpose  of  producing  and  preserving 
uniformity  in  the  Church.  Unfortunate  device  !  It  never 
could  have  had  a  more  full  and  authoritative  sway  than  that 
which  it  enjoyed  during  the  reigns  of  Elizabeth,  James,  and 
Charles  I. ;  and  it  produced  the  most  complete  anarchy,  and 
gave  rise  to  Sectarianism  to  the  greatest  extent,  and  in  the 
most  repulsive  forms,  that  ever  shocked  the  Christian 
world.  It  at  once  kept  men  in  ignorance,  and  drove  them 
to  madness ;  and  ever  since  it  has  appealed  to  their  frantic 
conduct  as  a  proof  of  its  own  calm  excellence. 

The  truth  of  this  view  may  be  shown  bj'^  a  parallel,  but 
a  strongly  contrasted  instance.  After  the  restoration  of 
Charles  II.,  the  Presbyterian  Church  of  Scotland  was  vio- 
lently overthrown,  and  its  adherents  subjected  to  twenty- 
eight  years  of  terrific  and  relentless  persecution.  Did  the 
people  of  Scotland  split  into  innumerable  and  extravagant 
s  cts,  when  thus  deprived  of  their  religious  teachers,  and 
oppressed  w4th  the  most  remorseless  cruelty  ]  They  did 
not.  One  sect  alone  appeared,  after  the  persecution  had 
lasted  t\venty  years,  and  in  a  parish  where  there  had  been 
a  prelatic  incumbent  all  that  time  ;  it  never  mustered  more 
than  four  men,  and  twenty-five  or  twenty-six  women,  and 
it  perished  Avithin  a  few  months.  What  caused  this 
remarkable  difTerence  ?  One  answer  only  can  be  given, — 
the  superiority  of  the  Presbyterian  system,  which  had  so 
thoroughly  instructed  the  people,  that  they  could  and  did 
retain  their  calm  and  regulated  consistency  of  doctrine  and 
clinracter  in  the  midst  of  every  maddening  and  delusive 
element ;  while,  on  the  other  hand,  when  the  prelatic  gov- 
ernment of  England  was  broken  up,  its  oppressed  and  igno- 
rant people  rushed  headlong  into  the  most  wild,  extrava- 
gant, and  pernicious  errors.  This  we  believe  to  be  the 
true  explanation  of  the  matter,  though  we  are  well  aware 
that  it  will  not  be  readily  admitted  by  the  admirers  of 
Prelacy.  But  the  truth  must  be  stated,  be  ofiended  who 
may  ;  and  it  will  be  well  for  Britain  and  for  Christendom, 
if,  should  a  period  of  similar  breaking  up  and  reconstruction 
arrive,  men  will  learn  by  the  sad  experience  of  the  past, 
and  never  more  presume,  either  to  supersede  God's  insti- 
tutions with  man's  inventions,  or,  in  their  violent  recoil, 


132  HISTORY  OF  THE 

refuse  to  submit  themselves  to  what  God  has  appointed, 
and  has  so  often  and  so  manifestly  honored  and  sanctioned 
with  His  blessing. 

The  pernicious  effect  of  these  multitudinous  sects  upon 
the  proceedings  of  the  Westminster  Assembly,  we  shall 
have  occasion  hereafter  to  show.  It  will  be  enough  here 
to  suggest  what  will  then  be  proved.  Although  the  Inde- 
pendent party  in  the  Assembly  did  not  openly  avow,  or 
rather  disclaimed  connection  with  the  Sectarians  that 
swarmed  throughout  the  kingdom,  yet  they  so  far  held 
intercourse  with  them,  and  occasionally  defended  them,  as 
to  secure  their  support,  and  thereby  to  render  themselves  in 
some  measure  the  representatives  of  a  large  portion  of  the 
English  community.  For  this  purpose  they  strove  to 
retard  the  progress  of  the  Assembly,  while  they  were 
mustering  their  adherents  and  concentrating  their  strength, 
— evidently  expecting  that  they  would  eventually  secure 
the  establishment  of  their  own  system.  In  the  Assembly 
and  Parliament  both,  they  had  the  aid  of  Sir  Harry  Vane 
the  younger,  one  of  the  most  subtle  politicians  of  the  age, 
— a  man  whose  mind  was  full  of  theoretic  and  impractica- 
ble speculations,  and  whose  restless  activity  of  temperament 
kept  him  perpetually  scheming  or  executing  something 
new, — whose  very  constitution  of  mind  was  sectarian^ 
because  it  was  constructed  in  sections,  without  continuity 
or  harmony.  And  in  the  Parliament  and  army  they  had  the 
far  more  important  support  of  Oliver  Cromwell,  with  whom 
they  held  constant  intercourse,  and  by  whom  there  is 
every  reason  to  believe  they  were  employed  and  over- 
reached. It  is  not  meant,  that  the  Independent  members 
of  Assembly  were  completely  identified  with  the  political 
Independents  of  the  army;  but  there  was  so  much  of  a 
community  of  feeling  and  interest  between  them,  that  it 
was  not  difficult  for  such  a  man  as  Cromwell  to  employ 
both  in  the  promotion  of  his  own  objects. 

What  we  have  termed  the  political  Independents  of  the 
army,  virere  composed  of  sectarians  of  every  possible  shade 
of  opinion;  and  from  them,  rather  than  from  the  religious 
Independents  in  the  Assembly,  arose  the  idea  of  toleration, 
of  which  so  much  use  was  subsequently  made.  As  used 
by  those  military  sectarians,  the  meaning  of  the  term  was, 
that   any  man  might  freely  utter  the   ravings  of  his  own 


WESTMINSTF.R   iASSEWBLV.  133 

heated  fancy,  and  endeavor  to  proselytize  others,  be  his 
opinions  what  they  might, — even  thousfh  nianifestly  sub- 
versive of  all  morality,  all  government,  and  all  revelation. 
Such  a  toleration,  for  instance,  as  would  include  alike 
Antinomians  and  Anabnptists,  though  teaching  that  they 
were  set  free  from  and  above  the  rules  of  moral  duty  so 
completely,  that  to  indulge  in  the  grossest  licentiousness 
was  in  them  no  sin ;  and  Levellers  and  Fifth-Monarchy 
Men,  whose  tenets  went  directly  to  the  subversion  of 
every  kind  of  constituted  government,  and  all  distinctions 
in  rank  and  property.  This  was  what  they  meant  by  tolera- 
tion^—and  this  was  what  the  Puritans  and  Presbyterinns 
condemned  and  wrote  against  with  startled  vehemence. 
And  it  is  neither  to  the  credit  of  the  Independent  divines 
of  that  period,  nor  of  their  subsequent  admirers  and 
followers,  that  they  seemed  to  countenance  such  a  tolera- 
tion, the  real  meaning  of  which  was,  civil,  moral, and  reli- 
gious anarchy.  It  is,  however,  true,  that  out  of  the  discus- 
sions which  this  claim  of  unbounded  and  licentious  tolera- 
tion raised  there  was  at  length  evolved  the  idea  of  religions 
toleration,  such  as  is  d  manded  by  man's  solemn  and  dread 
characteristic  of  personal  responsibility,  and  consequent 
inalienable  right  to  liberty  of  conscience.  And  let  it  be 
noted,  that  this  g-reat  idea  Avas  fully  admitted  by  those 
who  reasoned  nnd  wrote  most  strongly  against  the  "  un- 
bounded toleration"  claimed  by  the  Sectarians  ;  although, 
in  their  opposition  to  that  claim,  they  occasionally  used  lan- 
guage which  might  seem  to  condemn  what  in  reality  they 
both  demanded  for  themselves  and  readily  allowed  toothers.* 

It  is  us'ial  for  a  certain  class  of  writers  to  accuse  the 
Presbyterians  of  wishing  to  seize  and  wield  a  tyranny  as 
severe  as  that  of  Prelacy,  against  which  they  raised  such 
loud  complaints.  Without  undertaking  to  defend  all  that 
they  said  and  did,  this  may  be  safely  affirmed,  that  both 
the  principles  and  the  constitution  of  a  rightly  formed 
Presbyterian  Church  render  the  usurpation  of  power  and 
the  exercise  of  tyranny  on  its  part  wholly  impossible.  A 
Presbyterian  Church  in   the    process    of    formation,    still 

*  We  shall  have  occasion  in  a  subsequent  part  of  this  work,  to  prove 
that  the  true  idea  of  toleration,  in  its  right  moral  and  religious  sense, 
was  first  tau£:ht  and  first  exemplified  by  the  Presbyterian  Church  of 
Scotland,  next  by  the  Puritans,  and  tlien  adopted,  but  corrupted,  by  th^ 
Sectarians  and  Independents. 
12 


134  HISTORY    OF    THE 

trembling  from  the  savage  grasp  of  Prelacy,  and  surround' 
ed  by  wild  and  fearful  forms  of  sectarianism,  as  was  its 
condition  at  the  time  of  the  Westminster  Assembly,  might 
act  with  some  rashness  and  severity  ;  a  corrupt  Presbyte- 
rian Church,  such  as  was  that  of  Scotland  during  the  do- 
mination of  Moderatism,  might  act  despotically  ;  but  in 
its  own  nature,  with  its  subordination  of  courts,  and  an 
equal  or  preponderating  admixture  of  elders  in  them  all, 
it  can  neither  usurp  clerical  domination  nor  sink  into  jar- 
ring anarchy.  In  its  purest  state  and  its  fullest  exercise, 
it  gives  and  preserves  both  civil  and  religious  liberty, — 
both  doctrinal  truth  and  disciplinary  purity, — both  national 
instruction  and  national  peace.  On  the  other  hand.  Pre- 
lacy, in  its  most  powerful  and  active  state,  has  ever  tended 
to  destroy  both  civil  and  religious  liberty, — has  checked 
doctrinal  truth,  and  disregarded  disciplinary  purity, — has 
never  attempted  to  instruct  the  nation,  but  left  it  a  prey  to 
ignorance  and  errors, — and  has,  both  in  Scotland  and  Eng- 
land, inflicted  the  most  cruel  persecution,  and  given  rise 
to  bloody  civil  wars.  This  is  a  startling  contrast,  but  not 
more  startling  than  true.  There  is  yet  another  point  of 
contrast.  During  the  past  century  Prelacy  sunk  into  dor- 
mancy, and  became  mild  and  inoffensive  :  Presbytery  sunk 
into  dormancy,  and  became  cruel  and  oppressive,  as  if 
agitated  by  wild  dreams  under  that  fierce  incubus,  Mode- 
ratism. Prelacy  has  awoke,  and  begins  to  mutter  words 
of  fearful  import,  indicating  the  return  of  its  oppressive 
spirit :  Presbytery  has  awoke,  and  has  begun  her  hallowed 
work  of  instructing  her  own  people,  while  she  offers  her 
cordial  fellowship  to  all  who  love  her  Divine  and  only 
Head.  The  inference  is  obvious,  and  may  be  thus  stated. 
When  the  vital  spirit  of  Prelacy  is  inert,  it  becomes  com- 
paratively harmless:  when  the  vital  spirit  of  Piesbytery  is 
inert,  or  repressed,  it  becomes  oppressive.  Again,  when 
the  vital  spirit  of  Prelacy  is  active,  it  becomes  despotic 
and  persecuting,  intolerant  and  illiberal :  when  the  vital 
spirit  of  Presbytery  is  active,  it  becomes  gracious  and 
compassionate,  tolerant  of  everything  but  sin,  and  gener- 
ous to  all  who  believe  the  truth  and  love  the  Saviour.  Let 
the  thoughtful  reader  say,  which  system  is  of  human,  and 
which  of  divine  institution, — which  shows  a  spirit  of  the 
earth,  earthly,  and  which,  of  heavenly  origin  and  character  1 


CHAPTER    III 

THE  INDEPENDENT  CONTROVERSY,  ANNO   1644. 

The  Assembly  directed  to  begin  the  Subjects  of  Discipline,  Directory 
of  Worship,  and  Government — The  Subject  of  Church-otticers  staled 
and  Dicussed — Pastor — Doctor — Ruling  Elder — Deacon — Widow — 
Ordination  of  Ministers — Opposition  of  the  Independents — Consent 
of  the  Congregation,  or  Election — Contest  with  the  Parliament  about 
Ordination — Directory  for  Public  Worship — Propositions  concerning 
Presbyterial  Church  Government — The  Apologetical  Narration  by 
the  Independents — Answers  to  it — The  Antapologia — Views  of  the 
Independents — Keen  and  Protracted  Debates — Excommunication — 
Selden  and  Gillespie — Nye — Attempt  to  Accommodate — the  Power 
of  Congresation  — Suspension  and  Excommunication — Committee  of 
Accommodation — Proceedina:s  of  that  Committee — Suspended — Rea- 
sons of  Dissent  by  the  Independents — Answers  by  the  Assembly — 
General  Outline  of  these  Reasons  and  Answers — The  Independents 
Requested  and  Enjoined  to  State  their  own  Model  of  Church  Gov 
ernment — The  Publication  of  a  Copy  of  a  Remonstrance — Assem 
bly's  Answer  to  it — The  Committee  of  Accommodation  Revived — 
Additional  Papers  Prepared — Ends  without  Eileciing  an  Accommo- 
dation— Brief  Summary  of  the  Points  of  Disasrieemeni  between  the 
Presbyterians  and  Independents — Political  Intrigues — Errors  of  both 
Parties. 

About  a  fortnight  after  the  House  of  Commons  had  taken 
the  Solemn  League  and  Covenant,  and  while  the  Assem- 
bly of  Divines  were  eng-ajred  in  discussing  the  doctrinal 
tenets  of  the  sixteenth  of  the  Church  of  England's  Thirty- 
nine  Articles,  on  tlie  12th  of  October,  1643,  they  received 
an  order  from  both  Houses  of  Parliament,  requiring  them 
to  direct  their  deliberations  to  the  important  topics  of  dis- 
cipline, and  a  directory  of  worship  and  government.  The 
order  was  as  follows  : — ■ 

^'IJpon  serious  consideration  of  the  present  stale  and  conjuncture  of 
the  affairs  of  this  kingdom,  the  Lords  and  Commons  assembled  in 
Parliament  do  order,  that  the  Assembly  of  Divines  and  others  do  forth- 
with confer  and  treat  among  themselves,  of  such  a  discipline  and  gov- 
srnment  as  may   be   most  agreeable  to  God's  Holy  Word,  and  most  apl 


136  HISTORY  OF  THE 

to  procure  and  preserve  the  peace  of  the  Church  a!  home,  and  nearci 
agreement  with  the  Church  of  Scotland,  and  other  Reformed  Churches 
abroad,  to  be  settled  in  this  Church  in  stead  and  place  of  the  present 
Church  government  by  archbishops,  bishops,  and  their  chancellors, 
commissaries,  deans,  deans  and  chapters,  archdeacons,  and  other 
ecclesiastical  officers,  depending  upon  the  hierarchy,  which  is  resolved 
to  be  taken  away ;  and  touching  and  concerning  the  Directory  of 
Worship,  or  Liturgy,  hereafter  to  be  in  the  Church  ;  and  to  deliver  their 
opinions  and  advices  of,  and  touching  the  same,  to  both  or  either  House 
of  Parliament  with  all  the  convenient  speed  they  can." 

By  this  order  the  attention  of  the  Assembly  was  turned 
from  any  further  examination  of  the  Thirty-nine  Articles, 
and  fairly  directed  to  the  important  task  lor  the  accom- 
plishment of  which  they  had  been  called  together.  Baillie 
informs  us  that  Henderson  did  not  entertain  any  sanguine 
expectations  of  their  conformity  to  the  Church  of  Scotland, 
till  they  should  have  experienced  the  advantages  of  the 
Scottish  army's  presence  in  England.*  This  proves  that 
he  was  not  overreached  by  the  English  commissioners  in 
the  framing  of  the  solemn  League  and  Covenant,  but  was 
quite  aware  of  the  views  and  feelings  which  they  enter- 
tained, although  he  cherished  the  hope  that  circumstances 
might  lead  to  a  b  tter  result. 

After  having  made  some  preliminary  arrangements,  and 
prepared  their  own  minds  by  keeping  a  solemn  fast,  the 
Assembly  read  the  order  from  Parliament, pointing  out  the 
new  field  of  deliberative  discussion  on  which  they  were  to 
enter.  The  first  question  that  arose  regarded  the  order  of 
procedure,  whether  they  should  begin  with  government  or 
discipline,  and  it  w^as  agreed  that  they  should  begin  with 
the  subject  of  Church  government.  This  suggested  ano- 
ther preliminary  point,  whether  the  Scriptures  contain  a 
rule  for  government.  Goodwin  and  the  other  Independents 
eagerly  urged  that  this  question  should  be  first  of  all  de- 
bated and  decided,  he  expressing  his  conviction  that  the 
Word  of  God  did  contain  a  rule.  Lightfoot  opposed 
this  course,  and  wished  the  Assembly  first  of  all  to  give  a 
definition  of  the  leading  term  of  all  their  discussions,  "o 
Church.''^  It  is  evident  that  this  would  have  been  the  most 
logical  course,  first  to  define  a  Church,  then  to  inquire  into 
its  government,  and  lastly  to  treat  of  discipline,  which  is 
government  in  operation.     But  it  was  felt  that  this  course 

*  Baillie,  vol.  ii.  p.  104. 


WESTMINSTER   ASSEMBLY.  l^H 

would  brinof  forward  first  tlie  very  points  on  which  tli6 
greatest  diflerences  of  opinion  were  known  to  exist  ;  and 
therefore  it  was  judcred  prudent  ratlier  to  adopt  a  less  per- 
fect order  of  procedure,  for  tlie  purpose  of  ascertaining 
first  liow  far  all  could  agree,  in  the  liope  that  then  their 
differences  would  either  disappear,  or  be  capable  of  being 
brought  into  some  general  accommodation.  It  was  ac 
cordingly  resolved,  that  since  all  admitted  the  existence  of 
a  Church,  and  of  Church  government,  however  they  might 
differ  regarding  their  nature  and  extent,  these  subjects 
should  be  left  for  the  present  indefinite,  and  they  should 
commence  with  the  subject  of  office-bearers  in  the  Church, 
or,  to  use  their  own  term,  church-officers.* 

From  this  early,  and  comparatively  light  discussion,  it 
was  evident  that  both  parties  in  the  Assembly  were  keenly 
vigilant  lest  anything  should  be  done  which  might  in  any 
degree  prejudge  their  opinions  ;  and  consequently,  that 
their  debates  would  be  eager,  animated,  and  protracted,  on 
every  controverted  topic.  But  as  the  very  object  for 
which  the  Assembly  was  called  was  to  prepare  a  form  of 
Church  government,  of  discipline,  and  of  worship  for  the 
nation,  which  was  intended  to  be  final  and  lasting,  it  was 
judged  right  to  give  to  every  portion  of  their  great  work 
the  benefit  of  the  most  full  and  deliberate  discussion, 
though  at  the  expense  of  considerable  delay. 

Committees  according  to  the  usaal  arrangement,  had 
been  appointed  to  prepare  the  subject  of  Church-officers, 
for  public  discussion,  and  gave  in  their  separate  reports. 
That  of  the  second  committee  began  thus  : — "In  inquiring 
after  the  officers  belonging  to  the  Church  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament, we  first  find  that  Christ,  who  is  Priest,  Prophet, 
King,  and  Head  of  the  Church,  hath  fulness  of  power,  and 
containeth  all  other  offices,  by  way  of  eminency,  in  him- 
self; and  therefore  hath  many  of  their  names  attributed  to 
him."  To  this  sacred  and  comprehensive  proposition  they 
appended  a  number  of  Scripture  proofs,  in  six  divisions. 
The  following  names  of  Church-officers  were  mentioned 
as  given  in  Scripture  to  Christ: — 1.  Apostle;  2.  Pastor; 
3.  Bishop  ;  4.  Teacher  ;  b.  Minister,  or  Juxyot'og  ;  but  this 
last  name  Avas  rejected  by  the  Assembly,  as  not  meaning 
a  Church-officer  in  the  passage  where  it  is  used.  The  re* 
•  Lightfoot,  p.  20. 


138  HISTOUY  OF    THE 

port  of  the  third  committee  was  similar  in  character, 
ascribing",  in  Scripture  terms,  the  government  to  Jesus 
Christ,  who,  being  ascended  far  abov-^e  all  heavens,  "  hath 
given  all  officers  necessary  for  the  editicalion  of  his  Church  j 
some  whereof  are  extraordinary,  some  ordinary."  Out  of 
the  Scriptures  referred  to  they  found  the  following  offi- 
cers : — Apostles,  Evangelists,  Prophets,  Pastors,  Teachers, 
Bishops  or  Overseers,  Presbyters  or  Elders,  Deacons  and 
Widows.* 

In  the  discussion  which  followed  upon  the  reading  of 
these  reports,  it  is  rather  remarkable  that  the  Eraslians 
took  no  part  j  although  the  full  meaning  of  the  main  pro- 
position— that  Christ  contains  all  offices  by  way  of  emi- 
nency,  in  himself,  and  has  given  all  officers  necessary  for 
the  edification  of  his  Church — seems  to  contain  enough  to 
preclude  the  Erastian  theory.  But  we  shall  have  occasion 
to  show  the  reason  why  they  allowed  this  proposition  to 
pass  unchallenged.  It  did  not,  however,  escape  the  oppo- 
sition of  the  Independents.  Mr.  Goodwin  opposed  it,  as 
anticipating  the  Assembly's  work,  and  concluding  that 
Christ's  influence  into  his  Church  is  through  his  officers, 
wiiereas  he  questions  whether  it  be  conveyed  that  way  or 
not.  Again,  when  the  kingly  office  of  Christ  was  under 
discussion,  Goodvv'in  doubted  whether  the  Scriptures  prove 
that  Christ  is  King,  in  regard  of  discipline  in  the  Church. 
He  questioned  also  whether  the  headship  of  Christ  should 
be  specified,  as  beinsr  no  office  in  the  Church.  All  these 
objections  were  overruled,  and  the  reports  approved,  as 
the  basis  of  subsequent  deliberations. 

The  four  following  questions  were  also  reported  by  the 
third  committee  : — ''  1.  What  officers  are  mentioned  in  the 
NcAV  Testament  %  2.  What  officers  of  these  were  pro  tempore^ 
and  what  permanent  1  3.  What  names  are  common  to  divers 
officers,  and  what  restrained  1"  4.  What  the  office  of  those 
standing  officers?  The  general  names  of  officers  having  been 
already  stated,  the  debate  arose  on  the  .second  question — 
*'  W^hat  officers  were  perpetual  1"  The  office  of  Apostles  was 
declared  to  bo  only  pro  tempore^  and  extraordinary,  for  the 
eieht  followinnr  reasons  : — 1.  They  were  immediately  called 
by  Christ;  2.  'J  hey  had  seen  Christ  ;  3.  Their  commission 
was  throutfh  the  whole  world  ;  4<.  They  were  endued  with  iha 
•  Lightfoc»l,  p.  23. 


WESTMi.NSTKif   asi>i:;mi',ly.  ]3f? 

spirit  oi  infallibility  in  delivering  the  truths  ofdoctrine  to  the 
churclies  ;  n.  They  only  by  special  commission  were  set 
apart  to  be  personal  witnesses  of  Christ's  resurrection;  G. 
They  had  power  to  give  the  Holy  Ghost  ;  7.  They  were 
appointed  to  go  through  the  world  to  settle  churches,  in  a 
new  form  appointed  by  Christ  ;  8.  They  had  the  inspection 
and  care  of  all  the  churches.  Little  opposition  was  made  to 
these  reasons,  and  that  little  was  chiefly  made  by  Mr.  Good- 
win— particularly  respecting  the  power  of  the  apostles  to 
plant  and  settle  churches  ;  he  being  afraid,  apparently,  that  if 
he  admitted  this  power,  even  in  apostles,  it  might  so  far  con- 
demn the  practice  of  the  Independents,  where  ordinary  be- 
lievers formed  themselves  into  churches,  and  appointed 
their  own  officers  totally  without  the  intervention  or  aid 
of  any  other  church,  or  of  any  person  previously  ordained. 
Not  a  single  voice  was  raised  in  behalf  of  the  theory  first 
started  by  Bancroft,  and  carried  to  its  height  by  Laud — 
that  prelates  are  the  successors  of  the  apostles,  and  pos- 
sess their  office  in  its  authority,  in  virtue  of  unbroken  per- 
sonal apostolic  succession, — this  extravagant  absurdity 
being  abandoned  by  all. 

Another  point  respecting  the  apostleship  was  introduced, 
which  led  to  considerable  discussion,  not  on  its  own  ac- 
count, but  because  of  its  ultimate  consequence  • — That  the 
apostles  had  the  keys  (that  is,  the  power  of  government, 
doctrine,  and  discipline)  immediately  given  to  them  The 
importance  of  this  point  consisted  in  its  bearing  upon  the 
Independent  theory  ;  as  also,  though  not  so  directly,  upon 
Erastianism.  Lightfoot  granted  that  the  keys  were  uni- 
versally held  to  mean  the  government  of  the  Church  ;  but 
that  in  his  own  opinion  the  keys  were  given  to  Peter  only, 
to  open  the  door  of  admission  to  the  Gentiles;  and  that  lie 
regarded  the  power  of  the  keys  as  merely  the  authority  to 
declare  doctrinal  truths.  In  this  view,  as  we  shall  have 
occasion  to  show,  lay  the  germ  of  Lightfoot's  Erastianism. 
The  Independent  brethren  resisted  the  idea,  that  the  power 
of  the  keys  was  committed  to  the  apostles  in  any  sense 
implying  official  authority;  it  being  one  of  their  principles, 
that  the  Church,  in  their  sense  of  that  term,  namely,  ordi- 
nary believers,  possessed  all  power  and  authority.  Good- 
win, Simpson,  Burroughs,  and  Bridge,  all  engaged  in  this 
debate  ;  but  the  Assembly  affirmed  the  proposition. 


140  HISTORY  OF  THE 

The  next  discussion  arose  respecting  tlie  otHce  (4'  pastor 
which  the  report  stated  to  be  perpetual,  and  to  consist  ir 
feeding  the  flock,  and  in  the  dispensation  of  sacraments. 
In  the  term  '^feeding'''  was  included,  to  preach  and  teach, 
to  convince,  to  reprove,  to  exhort,  and  to  comfort.  Mr. 
Coleman  questioned  Avhether  a  pastor,  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, meant  the  ecclesiastical  officer  in  the  Church,  and 
not  constantly  the  civil.  This  was  supported  by  Lightfoot ; 
and  here  also  appeared  the  germ  of  their  Erastianism.  A 
long  discussion  followed  on  the  question,  Whether  the 
public  reading  of  the  Scriptures  be  the  pastor's  office  ] 
some  desiring  to  retain  what  was  termed  "  a  reader"  in 
each  congregation  ;  but  it  was  at  length  decided  to  belong 
to  the  pastor's  office.  The  duty  of  catechising  was  also 
assigned  to  the  pastor  ;  and  likewise  that  of  praying  when 
he  preached,  which  had  been  prohibited  by  the  bishops. 
It  was  also  held  that  it  belonged  to  the  pastor  to  take  care 
of  the  poor,  though  not  to  supersede  the  deacon's  office. 

The  next  subject  which  occupied  the  Assembly's  atten- 
tion vv^as  the  question,  whether  pastors  and  teachers,  or 
doctors,  formed  one  and  the  same  office.  The  Indepen- 
dents maintained  the  divine  institution  of  a  doctor,  as  dis- 
tinct from  a  pastor,  in  everjr  congregation.  It  had  been 
their  own  practice  to  have  a  doctor  or  teacher,  as  holding 
a  somevN^hat  subordinate  position  to  that  of  the  pastor, — one 
to  which  an  ordinary  member  might  readily  aspire,  form- 
ing" a  connecting  link  between  the  pastor  and  the  people  ; 
and  they  were  exceedingly  desirous  to  persuade  the  As- 
sembly to  retain  this  distinction.  On  the  other  hand,  this 
was  one  of  the  peculiarities  of  the  Congregational  system, 
difterent  from  what  prevailed  in  all  other  Churches,  and  it 
was  strenuously  and  even  keenly  resisted  by  the  Assembly. 
At  length  Henderson  interposed  to  procure  an  accommo- 
dation and  agreement  between  the  contending  parties.  It 
was  at  last  concluded  that  there  are  difierent  gifts,  and 
corresponding  difference  of  exercises  in  ministers,  though 
these  may  belong  to  the  same  person  ;  that  he  who  most 
excels  in  exposition  may  be  termed  a  doctor ;  that  such  a 
person  may  be  of  great  use  chiefly  in  universities;  and 
where  there  are  several  ministers  in  the  same  congregation, 
each  may  devote  himself  to  that  department  in  which  he 
most  excels  ;  and  that,  where  there  is  but  one,  he  must  to 


Wl-STMINSTKli    ASSEMI5LY.  141 

his  ability  perform  tlie  wljolc  work  of  the  ministry.  Hen- 
derson warned  the  Assembly  that  the  eyes  of  all  the  Re- 
formed Churches  were  upon  them,  earnestly  watching 
whether  their  proceedinjis  would  be  such  as  to  promote  or 
prevent  the  desired  uniformity  of  all  Protestant  Christen- 
dom; entreating  them  not  to  be  too  minutely  metaphysical 
and  abstract  in  treatiufj  of  such  matters,  but  rather  to  direct 
their  attention  to  leading-  and  important  topics,  with  the 
view  of  securing-  a  general  harmony,  though  smaller  points 
should  be  allowed  considerable  freedom  of  interpretation.* 
A  still  more  important  subject  then  came  before  the  As- 
sembly,— the  subject  of  ruling  elders  ;  on  the  right  under- 
standing and  decision  of  which  depended  the  adoption  or 
rejection  of  the  distinctive  principle  of  Presbyterian  Church 
government.  It  was  brought  forward  in  the  following 
terms: — "That  besides  those  presbyters  that  both  rule  well 
and  labor  in  the  word  and  doctrine,  there  be  other  presby- 
ters, who  especially  apply  themselves  to  ruling,  though 
they  labor  not  in  the  word  and  doctrine."  Aware  that  this 
order  of  Church-officers  was  almost  a  novelty  in  England, 
Henderson  took  an  early  part  in  the  debate,  showing  that 
it  had  been  used  in  the  Reformed  Churches  at  a  very  early- 
period, — even  before  its  institution  at  Geneva, — and  that 
it  had  proved  very  beneficial  to  the  Church  of  Scotland. 
Nearly  the  whole  talent  and  learning  of  the  Assembly  were 
called  into  long  and  strenuous  action  by  this  discussion, 
which  began  on  the  2'2d  of  November,  and  was  not  con- 
cluded till  the  8th  of  December.  The  institution  of  ruling 
eldei'  was  opposed  by  Dr.  Temple,  Dr.  Smith,  Mr.  Gataker, 
Mr.  Vines,  Mr.  Price,  Mr.  Hall,  Mr.  Lightfoot,  Mr.  Cole- 
man, Mr.  Palmer,  and  several  others,  besides  the  Indepen- 
dents,— of  whom,  however,  Nye  and  Bridge  opposed  but 
partially.  It  was  supported  by  Mr.  Marshall,  Mr.  Calamy, 
Mr.  Young,  Mr.  Seaman,  Mr.  Walker,  IMr.  Newcomen,  MV. 
Herle,  Mr.  Whitaker,  and  the  Scottish  divines, —  of  whom 
Rutherford  and  Gillespie  particularly  distinguished  them- 
selves. At  length,  having  thoroughly  exhausted  their  argu- 
ments, Henderson  moved  that  a  committee  might  be  ap- 
pointed to  draw  up  a  statement  how  far  all  parties  were 
agreed,  with  the  view  of  arriving  at  some  fair  accommoda- 
tion ;  and  being  supported  by  Goodwin,  this  motion  was 
*  Lightfoot,  pp.  53,  58;  Baillie,  vol.  ii.  p.  110. 


142  HISTORV    OF    THE 

aoreed  to,  and  the  debate  terminated.  The  report  of  the 
committee  contained  ihese  three  propositions: — ''  1.  Christ 
hath  instituted  a  government  and  governors  eccJesiastrcal 
in  the  Church  ;  2.  Christ  hath  furnished  some  in  his  Church 
with  gifts  for  government,  and  with  commission  to  exercise 
the  same  when  called  thereunto  ;  3.  It  is  agreeable  to,  and 
warranted  by,  the  Word  of  God,  that  some  others  beside 
the  ministers  of  the  Word,  or  Church-governors,  should 
join  with  the  ministers  in  the  government  of  the  Church." 
To  these  propositions  were  added  the  texts,  Rom.  xii.  7,  8, 
and  1  Cor.  xii.  28.  "Some  liked  the  propositions,"  says 
Lightfoot,  "  but  not  the  applying  of  the  places  of  Scripture  ; 
and  of  that  mind  was  I  myself, — for  the  proposition  I  un- 
derstood of  magistracy."*  The  first  and  second  proposi- 
tions were,  however,  affirmed  without  opposition,  and  the 
third  with  only  the  negative  vote  of  Lightfoot  himself  ^ 
the  texts  also  were  approved,  with  the  additional  opposi- 
tion of  Dr.  Temple. 

The  carrying  of  this  question  was  justly  regarded  as  of 
the  utmost  importance,  as  fixing  the  character  of  the 
Church  to  be  established;  and  it  is  matter  of  surprise  that 
the  opposition  sunk  so  nearly  to  nothing.  Even  the  ac- 
commodation by  means  of  which  these  propositions  were 
framed  and  carried,  was  somewhat  of  a  perilous  experi- 
ment;  for  it  narrowly  missed  introducing  the  unsound 
principle  of  admitting  into  the  arrangements  of  the  Church 
what  had  no  higher  authority  than  considerations  of  expe 
diency  and  prudence.  For  all  were  willing  to  have  admit 
ted  the  order  of  ruling  elders  on  these  grounds;!  but  thiir- 
was  decidedly  rejected,  especially  by  the  Scottish  divines, 
and  by  tho^e  of  the  Puritans  or  English  Presbyterians  who 
fully  understood  the  nature  of  the  controversy  so  long 
waged  by  their  predecessors  against  admitting  into  a  di- 
vine institution  anything  of  merely  human  invention. 

There  was  yet  one  point  to  be  discussed  respecting  the 
ruling  elder.  It  had  been  decided  that  this  officer  Is  of 
divine  institution,  but  it  remained  to  define  in  what  his 
office  consisted;  and  this  gave  rise  to  another,  and  a  very 
animated  debate.  In  the  previous  discussion  respecting 
the  office  itself,  considerable  weight  had  been  attached  to 
the  argument  drawn  from  the  constitution  of  the  Jewish 
*  Lighttoot,  p.  76.  *  Baillie,  vol.  ii.  p.  Jll. 


WESTMINSTER    JiSSEMDLV.  143 

Church,  and  from  llie  ciders  of  the  people  in  ihul  insliiu- 
tion;  and  when  preparing-  to  define  the  office  of  an  eUler 
in  the  Christian  Chnrch,  reference  was  again  made  to  the 
corresponding  functionary  among  the  Jews  ;  and  the  ques- 
tion arose,  whether  the  Hebrew  elders  were  chosen  pur- 
posely for  ecclesiastical  business;  Coleman  first  brought 
forward  the  inquiry,  affirming  that  both  the  elders  and  the 
seventy  senators  in  the  sanhedrim  were  civil  officers  ;  Mr. 
Calamy  and  Dr.  Burgess  both  held  the  reverse;  and  Mr. 
Gillespie  proved  that  the  seventy  were  joined  with  both 
Moses  and  Aaron  at  their  institution, — that  the  elders  in 
other  passages  of  Scripture  are  joined  with  the  priests, 
and  in  others  with  prophets,  and  in  others  are  spoken  of 
as  distinct  from  the  rulers.*  Lightfoot  somewhat  differed 
from  Coleman,  and  also  Irom  Selden,  who  took  part  in  this 
debate  ;  and  after  a  very  learned  and  animated  discussion, 
the  opinions  of  the  Assembly  being  nearly  balanced,  the 
subject  was  laid  aside  for  a  time,  without  any  definite 
conclusion. 

The  office  of  deacon  next  engaged  their  attention.  The 
institution  of  this  office  was  not  denied,  but  several  were 
of  opinion  that  it  was  of  a  temporary  nature.  This  view 
Vv'as  entertained  by  few  except  the  Erastians  ;  and  when 
the  Assembly  decided  that  the  office  of  deacon  was  of  a 
permanent  nature,  Lightfoot  alone  voted  in  the  negative, 
though  both  Coleman  and  Selden  had  spoken  agamst  it. 
The  opposition  to  the  permanency  of  this  office  seems  to 
have  arisen  chiefly  from  the  fact,  that  there  existed  in 
England  a  civil  poor-law,  instituted  in  the  reign  of  Eliza- 
beth ;  which  led  some  to  oppose  the  deaconship  as  unne- 
cessary, and  others,  as  interfering  with  a  civil  arrangement. 
It  was  well  suggested  by  Mr.  Vines,  "  that  the  provision 
of  civil  officers  made  by  the  civil  State  for  the  poor  should 
rather  slip  into  the  office  of  a  deacon,  than  the  reverse, 
because  the  latter  bears  the  badge  of  the  Lord." 

As  the  report  concerning  Church-officers  had  mentioned 
"  widows,"  this  was  the  last  point  to  be  discussed,  whether 
widows  are  to  be  c(msidered  as  deaconesses,  and  their 
office  one  of  permanent  continuation  in  the  Church.  Some 
of  the  Independents,  and  one  or  two  others,  were  inclined 
to  retain  this  office  ;  but  after  some  debate  it  was  decided 
•  Lightfoot,  p.  78. 


144  EISTOKY  OF  THE 

t^hat  the  existence  of  such  an  office  in  the  Church  was  not 
proved.  With  this  discussion  terminated  the  year  1643, 
in  which  the  business  of  the  Assembly  had  been  chiefly  of 
a  preliminary  character.  It  had,  however,  been  solemnly 
decided,  that  Christ  is  so  completely  the  Head  of  the 
Church,  that  all  its  offices  are  essentially  in  him,  and  from 
him  are  they  all  primarily  and  authoritatively  derived  ;  that 
of  these  offices  some  are  extraordinary,  and  have  ceased — 
those,  namely,  of  apostles,  prophets,  and  evangelists  ;  that 
pastors  and  doctors,  or  teachers,  are  essentially  the  same, 
and  form  the  highest  order  of  divinely  appointed  officers  in 
the  Church  ;  that  ruling  elders  are  also  of  divine  appoint- 
ment, and  are  distinct  from  pastors  ;  and  that  deacons  are 
likewise  of  divine  and  permanent  institution,  though  not 
entitled  to  preach  or  to  rule,  but  to  take  charge  of  charita- 
ble and  pecuniary  concerns.  And  as  considerable  progress 
had  thus  been  made,  reasonable  hopes  might  have  been 
cherished  that  the  business  of  the  Assembly  would  con- 
tinue to  proceed  with  as  much  celerity  as  was  consistent 
with  the  grave  deliberation  due  to  its  vast  importance. 

But  there  were  other  elements  of  a  less  propitious  na- 
ture at  work,  some  of  which  had  already  appeared,  and 
others  were  felt,  though  scarcely  yet  fully  visible.  On  the 
19th  of  October,  soon  after  the  Assembly  had  seriously 
begun  its  task,  the  House  of  Commons  intimated  through 
Dr.  Burgess,  their  desire  that  two  points  should  be  decided 
upon  as  speedily  as  possible,  namely,  an  arrangement  for 
their  ordination  of  ministers  j  and  an  arrangement  for  the 
institution  and  induction  to  vacant  benefices.*  The  for- 
mer of  these  points  could  not  be  determined  till  the  Assem- 
bly should  have  discussed  the  subject  of  Church-officers  in 
general.  But  as  the  latter  was  a  subject  of  immediate  and 
urgent  importance,  a  committee  was  appointed  to  deter- 
mine in  what  manner  trial  should  be  made  of  the  qualifica- 
tions of  those  who  might  apply  for  those  vacant  benefices. 
Twenty-one  rules  of  examination  were  at  length  drawn  up, 
in  conformity  with  which  every  applicant  was  to  be  tried, 
in  order  to  ascertain  his  soundness  in  doctrine  and  fitness 
for  the  situation.  Application  was  frequently  made  by 
ministers  who  had  been  cruelly  plundered  by  the  king's 
army,  and  constrained  to  flee  to  London,  both  for  safety 

•  Lighlfoot,  p.  24. 


WESTMINSTER   ASSEMBLY.  1-^5 

and  to  seek  some  kind  of  maintenance.  The  examination 
of  such  applicants  proved  to  be  a  very  delicate  task,  as 
the  kincr's  army  plundered  alike  the  sound  Puritans  and  the 
erratic  Sectarians — so  that  persons  of  each  character  made 
application  to  the  Assembly.  Sometimes  tlie  Sectarians, 
knowino-  that  no  rule  of  ordination  had  yet  been  framed, 
procured  ordination  from  other  Sectarians,  and  nttempted 
to  deceive  the  exnminators  ;  and  when  this  was  either  not  at- 
tempted, or  found  impracticable,  they  then  endeavored  to 
form  a  party  among  the  citizens,  and  others  who  had 
flocked  to  London,  that  from  them  they  might  derive  a 
means  of  subsistence.  This  led  directly  to  a  prodigious 
increase  of  sectarianism  in  London,  and  tended  to  throw  the 
whole  city  into  a  state  of  confusion  and  anarchj-.  To  remedy 
this  state  of  matters,  the  city  ministers  presented  a  suppli- 
cation to  the  Assembly,  lamenting  their  disturbed  condi- 
tion— requesting  order  to  be  taken  for  the  ordination  of 
ministers — stating  the  fearful  increase  of  pernicious  sects, 
and  complaining  of  their  restless  endeavors  to  gather  sepa- 
rate congregations — and  requesting  the  Assembly  to  inter- 
cede with  the  Parliament  for  the  redress  of  these  griev- 
ances, and  for  the  erection  of  a  college  at  London,  where 
the  youth  might  be  educated,  as  Oxford  was  in  the  posses- 
sion of  the  king.*  The  Assembly  answered,  that  it  was 
not  yet  safe  to  meddle  with  the  ordination  of  ministers — 
that  they  had  applied  to  the  Parliament  for  redress  in  the 
other  matters — and  desired  information  to  be  given  respect- 
ing those  who  gather  churches,  that  in  this  also  they  may 
seek  redress.  ]\Ir.  Nye  objected  to  the  expression  against 
gathering  churclies,  and  was  sharply  answered.!  This 
apparently  slight  incident  we  have  mentioned,  because  it 
indicates  the  line  of  policy  which  the  Independent  party 
were  beginning  to  pursue,  in  connecting  themselves  with 
the  mass  of  Sectarians  throughout  the  kingdom,  in  which 
Nye  performed  so  active  a  part,  and  of  which  he  seems  to 
have  been  the  chief  contriver. 

[lej-i.]  The  year  lb4^4<  began  with  the  introduction  into 
the  Assembly  of  subjects  still  more  certain  to  produce 
cli?union  than  any  that  had  been  previously  discussed. 
The  general   subject  of  Church-officers  had  been  so  far 

•  Lightfoot,  p.  57  ;  Baillie,  vol.  ii.  p.  111.         f  Lightfoot,  p.  62. 
13 


146  HISTORY  OF  THF 

determined  ;  but  the  most  important  parts  of  this  rnatlel 
remained  to  be  debated, — namely,  the  method  of  appoint- 
ing Church-officers,  and  the  authority  which  they  ought  to 
possess,  or,  in  other  words,  ordination  and  discipline. 
Well  did  the  Assembly  know  that  great  diversity  of  opinion 
would  arise  on  these  two  leading  points,  and  gladly  would 
they  have  avoided  entering  upon  them  till  a  subsequent 
period,  had  it  been  at  all  practicable.  But  the  disturbed 
state  of  the  country,  increased  and  aggravated  by  the  want 
of  religious  ordinances  and  government,  rendered  it  impe- 
ratively necessary  that  some  steps  should  be  taken  for  the 
remedy  of  so  many  and  such  great  national  maladies.  A 
commission  had  been  appointed  in  September,  1643,  for  the 
purpose  of  inquiring  into  the  conduct  of  ministers  through- 
oat  the  country,  and  of  removing  all  such  as  were  convict- 
ed of  scandalous  conduct,  or  proved  to  be  des4;itute  of  suf- 
ficient qualifications.  On  the  17th  of  November,  Parlia- 
ment authorised  the  publication  of  a  treatise,  entitled, 
"  The  First  Century  of  Scandalous  and  Malignant  Priests, 
or,  a  narration  of  the  causes  for  which  Parliament  hath 
ordered  the  sequestration  of  the  benefices  of  several  min- 
isters complained  of  before  them,  &c."  This  was  drawn 
up  by  Mr.  White,  M.P.,  the  chairman  of  the  commission  ,• 
and  it  certainly  proves  that  the  ministers  so  sequestered 
were  utterly  unworthy  of  the  sacred  office,  or  rather,  that 
many  of  them  were  unv/orthy  of  the  name  of  men,  though 
we  cannot  pollute  our  pages  by  quotations.*  The  reason 
of  referring  to  the  subject,  is  to  show  the  necessity  thence 
arising  for  ihe  ordination  of  other  men  to  supply  the  bene- 
fices become  vacant  by  means  of  these  sequestrations. 
However  desirous,  therefore,  the  Assembly  were  to  post- 
pone the  consideration  of  a  subject,  on  which  they  were 
certain  to  disagree,  till  they  should  have  framed  a  Confes- 
sion of  Faith,  and  other  matters,  in  which  entire  unanimity 
was  expected,  they  were  constrained  reluctantly  to  pro- 
ceed to  doubtful  disputations. 

'I'here  is  considerable  difficulty  in  giving  a  direct  and 
••ontinuous  view  of  the  discussions  on  which  we  are  now 
lo  e«nter,  in  consequence  of  the  contemporaneous,  or  rather 
iiuertwined  manner  in  which  they  arose  and  were  con- 
ducted. For  instead  of  continuing  steadily  to  prosecute 
•  Frst  Century,  ^0. 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBLY.  11-1 

one  nubjcct  till  it  was  completed,  and  tlioii  passitig  on  to 
another,  tliere  were  generally  two  or  three  subjects  under 
deliberation  at  the  same  period,  eacli  being  peculiarly 
intrusted  to  one  or  other  of  the  committees  in  which  they 
were  prepared  for  public  debate,  and  were  successively  laid 
aside  and  resumed  according  to  their  respective  states  of 
preparation.  For  example,  on  the  '2d  of  January,  1644*,  the 
two  following  subjects  were  both  brought  forward:  "Pas- 
tors and  teachers  have  power  to  inquire  and  judge  who  are 
fit  to  be  admitted  to  the  sacraments,  or  kept  from  them  ; 
as  also  who  are  to  be  excommunicated  or  absolved  from 
that  censure  ;"  and,  "  The  apostles  had  power  to  ordain 
officers  in  all  churches,  and  to  appoint  evangelists  to  or- 
dain." Notwithstanding  the  general  terms  employed,  it 
was  impossible  to  discuss  tliese  propositions  without  bring- 
ing forward  the  very  points  on  which  the  greatest  amonnt 
of  division  existed,  namely,  discipline  and  ordination. 
And  as  they  investigated  every  topic  in  a  minute  and  scho- 
lastic manner,  by  a  series  of  fine-drawn  distinctions,  and 
syllogistic  propositions  previously  prepared  in  the  com- 
mittees, it  almost  inevitably  followed,  that  the  business  of 
the  committees  came  before  the  Assembly  on  alternate 
days.  In  order  to  avoid  the  seeming  confusion  of  such  a 
mode  of  procedure,  it  will  be  expedient  to  trace  each  sepa- 
rate subject  till  its  completion,  instead  of  attempting  to 
carry  them  forward  contemporaneously,  as  the  Assembly 
did. 

It  \vas  in  consequence  of  the  m.ethod  of  treatmg  every 
subject  minutely,  and  as  convenience  served,  that  the  pro- 
position respecting  the  apostolic  office  was  thus  brought 
forward,  long  after  its  main  elements  had  been  defined,  and 
its  character  as  extraordinary  and  temporary  admitted. 
When  this  part  of  the  definition  was  stated,  namely,  "  That 
the  apostles  had  power  to  ordain  officers  in  all  churches, 
and  to  nppoint  evangelists  to  ordain;"  the  Independents 
were  afraid,  that  if  this  passed  unquestioned,  it  might  be 
held  to  have  been  already  decided  that  the  apostles  alone 
had  that  power,  and  that  they  had  so  transmitted  it  by 
church-officers,  that  none  others  could  ordain  ;  whereas 
they  held  that  tlie  church  itself,  that  is,  ordinary  church- 
members  assembled,  possessed  that  power.  It  was  also 
disputed    whether  the  term  used,  Acts  xiv.  23,  Xeigoiovla, 


14.8  inSTORY    OF    THE 

meant  ordination  or  election;  and  on  this  point  a  long  de- 
bate took  place,  Gillespie,  Vines,  Simpson,  and  others,  hold- 
ing-  that  i  lection  was  the  proper  meaning.*  After  some 
further  debate  on  the  power  of  the  apostles  to  appoint 
evangelists  to  ordain,  the  whole  proposition  received  the 
sanction  of  the  Assembly. 

On  tbe  9th  of  January,  the  whole  question  of  ordination 
was  fairly  stated  by  Dr.  Temple,  chairman  of  one  of  the 
committees,  in  the  following  series  of  interrogatory  propo- 
sitions : — "  1.  What  ordination  is  1  2.  Whether  necessa- 
rily to  be  continued  \  3.  Who  to  ordain  1  4.  What  per- 
sons to  be  ordained,  and  how  qualified  ?  5.  The  manner 
how  !"  To  these  were  appended  the  following  answers 
for  the  Assembly's  consideration: — '*  1.  Ordination  is  the 
solemn  setting  apart  of  a  person  to  some  public  office  in 
\\\e  Church.  2.  It  is  necessarily  to  be  continued  in  the 
Cliurcli.  3.  The  apostles  ordained,  evangelists  did,  preach- 
ing presbyters  did;  because  apostles  and  evangelists  are 
officers  extraordinary,  and  not  to  continue  in  the  Church  ; 
and  since,  in  Scripture,  we  find  ordination  in  no  other 
itands,  we  humbly  conceive  that  the  preaching  presbyters 
five  onlj-  to  ordain."  The  first  proposition  was  affirmed 
without  much  debate.  The  second  was  opposed  chiefly 
because  of  the  word  "  necessarily,"  Mr.  Nye  question- 
ing whether  it  were  necessitate  jinis^  ox  necessitate  pi  ecepti^ 
• — a  necessity  for  the  accomplishment  of  the  purpose,  or  a 
necessity  arising  out  of  its  being  commanded.  Both  sides 
shrunk  from  the  danger  of  division  on  this  point;  and  hav- 
ing changed  the  word  "necessarily"  into  "always,"  the 
proposition  was  affirmed.  In  the  next  proposition  it  was 
easily  admitted,  that  apostles  and  evangelists  ordained  ;  but 
when  tliat  passage  1  Tim.  iv.  14,  was  referred  to,  as  prov- 
ing that  preaching  presbyters  ordained,  a  very  considerable 
debate  arose,  Lightfoot,  in  particular,  asserting  that  it  must 
mean,  not  ordination,  but  admission  to  be  an  elder  ;  and 
when  it  was  affirmed  by  the  Assembly,  he  and  some  others 
voted  in  the  negative. f 

This  was,  however,  merely  the  beginning  of  the  strug- 
gle. When  the  latter  part  of  the  proposition  was  brought 
forward  for  debate,  "preaching  presbyters  were  only  to 

*  Lightfoot,  pp.  JOO-102;  Baillie,  vol.  ii.  p.  129. 
t  Lightfoot,  p.  113. 


WF.STMINSTER    ASSEMBLY.  Ii9 

ordain,"  it  way  felt  by  all,  that  to  this  the  Independenta 
would  not  assent  without  some  modification.  Calamy, 
Gillespie,  and  Seaman,  proposed,  therefore,  that  a  commit- 
tee of  Independents  might  be  chosen,  who  sliould,  in  their 
own  terms,  state  the  question  concerning  ordination  ;  in 
the  hope  that,  by  having  both  views  of  the  subject  brought 
forv/ard  at  once,  it  might  be  possible  to  fuse  and  blend 
them  together,  so  as  to  prevent  division.  Their  report  was 
given  in  by  Mr.  Nye,  as  follows  :—"  1.  Ordination,  for  the 
substance  of  it  is  the  solemnization  of  an  officer's  outward 
call,  in  which  the  elders  of  the  Church,  in  the  name  of 
Christ,  and  for  the  Church,  do,  by  a  visible  sign,  design  the 
person,  and  ratify  his  separation  to  his  office,  with  prayer 
for,  and  blessing*  upon  his  gifts  in  the  ministration  thereof. 
2.  Tliat  the  power  that  gives  the  formal  being  to  an  offi- 
cer, should  be  derived" by  Christ's  institution  from  the 
power  that  is  in  the  elders  as  such,  on  the  act  of  ordina- 
tion,— as  yet,  we  find  not  anywhere  held  forth  in  the 
Word."  It  will  readily  be  supposed  that  the  Assembly 
must  have  listened  to  such  vague  and  unintelligible  propo- 
sitions wnth  considerable  amazement,  not  unmingled  with 
displeasure,  to  find  their  courtesy  requited  by  such  studied 
ambiguity,  certainly  not  calculated,  and  it  could  scarcely 
be  thought  intended,  to  promote  agreement.  They  ques- 
tioned the  use  of  the  word  "elders"  as  obscure  and  ambi- 
guous ;  also  the  expression  "  for  the  Church,"  which  Nye 
interpreted,  vice  ecclesiae,  in  the  stead  of  the  Church. 
"Other  scrupulous  and  ambiguous  passages,"  says  Light- 
foot,  "were  found;  which,  after  a  very  long  canvass  upon 
them,  were  laid  by,  and  our  old  proposition  re-assumed."* 
The  conduct  of  the  Independents,  on  this  occasion,  was 
both  discreditable  in  itself,  and  led  to  very  pernicious 
results.  It  was  discreditable  either  to  their  candor  or 
their  talents,  to  produce  propositions  couched  in  such 
ambiguous  language,  much  more  calculated  to  j)erplex  than 
to  clear  the  subject ;  and  as  they  Avere  men  of  decided 
abilities,  the  accusation  falls  upon  their  character,  and  con- 
strains us  to  regard  them  as  uncandid  and  disingenuous. 
But  finding  that  they  had  succeeded  so  ill  in  their  attempts 
to  deceive  or  confuse  in  this  instance,  they  never  again  could 
be  prevailed  upon  to  state  to  the  Assembly  their  own 
*    Liirhtfoot,  p.  115. 

13* 


150  HISTORY    OF    THE 

opinions  in  writing,  though  sufficiently  pertinacious  in 
retaining  them,  and  supporting  them  by  every  kind  of 
argument.  The  new  course  of  tactics  thus  adopted  proved 
the  means  of  retarding  the  Assembly  beyond  measure,  and 
ended  at  last  in  rendering  all  its  prolonged  toils  compara- 
tively abortive. 

When  the  Assemh)]y  was  on  the  point  of  .resuming  the 
consideration  of  its  own  propositions.  Lord  iManchester 
entered,  bringing  an  order  from  thie  House  of  Lords,  which 
required  the  Assembly  to  make  haste  and  conclude  the 
subject  of  ordination.  A  committee  Avas  appointed  to  pre- 
pare the  matter  fo-r  public  discussion  ;  and  next  day,  2'2d 
January,  the  two  following  propositions  were  reported: 
— "  1.  That  in  extraordinary  cases  something  extraordi- 
nary may  be  done,  until  a  settled  order  may  be  had ;  yet 
keeping  as  close  as  may  be  to  the  rule.  2.  It  is  lawful, 
and  according  to  the  Word,  that  certain  ministers  of  the 
city  be  desired  to  ordain  ministers  in  the  city  and  vicinity, 
jure  fraternitatisy  A  keen  debate  ensued,  Coleman, 
Goodwin,  and  Nye  opposing, — Vines,  Seaman,  Lightfoot, 
and  others  supporting  the  report.  Nye,  in  particular, 
offered  the  most  determined  and  pertinacious  resistance  to 
the  clause,  "keeping  as  close  to  the  rule  as  may  be." 
"  Again,"  says  Lightfoot,  "  he  interposed,  again,  and 
again;"*  but,  in  the  end,  the  vote  Avas  carried  in  the  affirm- 
ative. Every  kind  of  scruple  was  started,  every  kind  of 
objection  brought  forward  by  the  Independents,  aided  by 
Selden,  wnth  whom  they  did  not  hesitate  to  make  common 
cause  in  this  matter.  Nye  even  went  so  far  as  to  argue 
that  bishops  might  still  ordain,  rather  than  he  would  admit 
the  case  to  be  extraordinary,  requiring  a  prompt  remedial 
measure.  In  order,  if  possible,  to  end  the  tedious  debate, 
it  was  proposed  by  Gillespie,  that  the  question  of  a  pres- 
bytery should  be  expressly  declared  as  still  left  open  ;  and 
Vines  moved  that  the  Independents  should  propose  their 
own  way  for  the  supply  of  the  present  necessity.  The 
Earl  of  Pembroke  urged  haste,  as  both  Church  and  king- 
dom were  on  fire,  and  might  be  destroyed  during  such  te- 
dious delays  ;  but  Nye  would  not  abate  his  opp®sition. 
After  a  keen  and  even  stormy  debate  of  fourteen  days'  du- 
ration, the  subject  was  laid  aside,  in  compliance  with  the 
*  Lightfoot,  p.  117. 


VE.>TML\STER    ASSEMIU.V.  151 

request  of  Lord  Saj-,  who  supported  the  Independents  ; 
and  \vl)o  sug^gested  that  it  would  really  expedite  the  mat- 
ter first  to  decide  what  onjrht  to  be  the  ordinary  way  and 
rulo  of  ordination,  to  which  anything-  extraordinary  could 
be  then  made  to  conform.  The  cause  of  the  extreme  ob- 
stinacy of  the  Independents  in  this  discussion,  was  their 
fear  that  it  would  overrule  two  points  which  they  held  to 
be  of  vital  importance,  involving  the  very  essence  of  their 
system,  namely,  the  power  of  ordination  by  a  single  con- 
gregation ;  and  the  existence  and  powers  of  a  presbytery. 
The  Assembly  repeatedly  assured  them  that  these  subjects 
should  not  be  regarded  as  in  any  respect  decided  ;  and 
Gillespie  tendered  four  distinct  arguments  to  show  that  it 
could  not  determine  the  question  of  a  presbytery.* 

The  subject  of  ordination  was  again  resumed  on  the 
18th  of  March,  partly  vvith  reference  to  the  existing  neces- 
sity, and  partly  as  occurring  in  the  course  of  discussion 
respecting  the  calling  and  appointment  of  ministers.  One 
additional  element  of  some  importance  was  now  intro- 
duced, which  led  to  another  still  more  important, — the 
first  was  the  necessity  of  designation  to  some  particular 
place,  to  avoid  disorder  and  irregularity  ;  and  the  second, 
arising  out  of  this,  was,  the  consent  of  the  congregation 
to  which  the  pastor  is  to  be  ordained.  The  form  of  the 
proposition  brought  forward  on  this  point  was,  "  That  he 
be  recommended  to  that  congregation  to  whom  he  is  to 
be  a  minister,  and  have  their  consent,  unless  they  can 
show  just  cruise  of  exception  against  him."  Gillespie  pro- 
posed to  add,  '  Or  will  petition  for  a  man  that  they  con- 
ceive may  be  more  advantageous  to  them  in  his  preaching, 
and  more  powerful  upon  their  experience."  Henderson 
wished  this  question  to  be  debated  :  "  The  presbytery  re- 
commend one,  and  the  people  desire  another  ;  how  shall 
it  be  determined  1"  Gillespie  desired  that  this  might 
hold  :  "  In  no  case,  in  a  settled  church,  a  minister  may  be 
obtruded  on  a  congregation."  Rutherford  said,  "  The 
Scriptures  constantly  give  the  choice  of  the  pastor  to  the 
people.  The  act  of  electing  is  in  the  people  ;  and  the 
regulating  and  correcting  of  their  choice  is  in  the  presby- 
tery." Gillespie  again  resumed:  "But  if  they  cannot 
show  just  cause  against  him,  what  then  is  to  be  done  1 
•  Lighlfoot,  p.  130. 


15*2  HISTORV    OF    THE 

The  people  say,  Vie  see  no  error  in  him,  in  life  and  doi 
trine,  but  honor  and  reverence  him;  but  we  can  lettei 
profit  by  another  :  what  is  to  be  done  in  this  case  1"  He 
then  moved  that  this  proposition  miglit  be  debated  :  '^He 
that  is  to  be  ordained  be  not  obtruded  against  the  will  of 
the  congregation  ;  for  the  prelates  are  for  obtrusion,  the 
separation  for  a  popular  voting ;  therefore  let  us  go  in  a 
medium."  At  length  the  debate  terminated  by  the  passing 
of  the  following  proposition  : — "  No  man  shall  be  ordained 
a  minister  of  a  particular  congregation,  if  they  can  show 
any  just  cause  of  exception  against  him."* 

In  the  beginning  of  April  the  Assembly  completed  th.e 
doctrinal  part  of  ordination,  and  proceeded  to  frame  a 
directory  how  it  should  be  conducted.  A  committee  was 
chosen  to  prepare  it  for  debate,  consisting  of  Messrs.  Pal- 
mer, Herle,  Marshall,  Tuckney,  Seaman,  Vines,  Goodwin, 
Gataker,  and  the  Scottish  ministers.  Their  report  was 
given  in  and  ratified  on  the  19tii  of  April,  and  next  day 
laid  before  both  houses  of  Parliament.  Although  Parlia- 
ment had  repeatedly  urged  the  Assembly  to  hasten  for- 
ward tbe  directory  and  rules  for  ordination  5  yet,  when 
this  had  been  done,  the  matter  was  allowed  to  remain  in- 
operative for  want  of  the  ratification  of  the  Legislature, 
from  the  20th  of  April,  when  it  was  received,  till  the  15th 
of  August.  Before  it  was  returned,  some  rumors  had 
been  in  circulation  that  consid<  rable  alterations  had  been 
made  by  the  Parliament  ;  and  when  it  was  actually  pro- 
duced before  the  Assembly,  these  were  found  to  be  more 
extensive  than  had  even  been  apprehended.  They  had 
omitted  the  whole  doctrinal  part  of  ordination,  and  all  the 
scriptural  grounds  for  it  ;  and  they  had  chosen  only  the 
extraordinary  way  of  ordination,  and  even  in  that  part  had 
struck  out  whatever  might  displease  the  Independents,  the 
patrons,  and  the  Erastians.f  The  Scottish  commissioners 
would  by  no  means  consent   to  these  alterations;  and,  in 

*  Ljo^htfoot,  pp.  230-233.  The  conduct  and  language  of  the  Scottish 
divines  in  this  debate  prove  clearly  that  they  held  the  principle  of  elec- 
tion by  the  people  to  be  the  right  one ;  and  that  the  utmost  modification 
of  it  to  which  they  could  consent  was,  that  no  man  be  intruded.  They 
were,  in  short,  what  would  now  be  termed  "  decided  Non-Intrusionists,^^ 
at  the  least ;  and  their  consent  to  a  modified  proposition  was  caused  by 
their  dread  of  the  sectarian  confusion  then  prevalent  in  P'ngland. 

t  Baillie,  vol.  ii.  pp.  198  and  221. 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBLY  153 

an  address  to  the  Grand  Committee  of  Lords,  Commons, 
and  the  Assembly,  they  expressly  condemned  them.  This 
decided  conduct,  aided  by  a  timely  petition  to  both  Honse-^ 
from  the  city  ministers,  produced  the  desired  effect  ;*  and, 
on  the  IGlh  September,  the  Assembly's  directory  for  ordi- 
nation was  returned,  restored  to  its  original  condition.  On 
the  18th,  a  committee  was  appointed  for  the  ordina'tion  of 
ministers,  consisting  of  ten  of  the  Assembly  divines,  and 
thirteen  of  those  belonging  to  the  city  of  London.  This 
was  ratified  by  both  Houses  on  the  2d  of  October  j  and 
thns  that  long  delayed  point  was  concluded.! 

As  the  discussions  respecting  the  directory  for  public 
worship  were  not  of  such  importance  as  those  concerning 
government  and  discipline,  and  were  first  concluded, 
though  not  begun  till  after  the  other  had  continued  for  a 
considerable  time,  it  will  conduce  to  simplicity  and  clear- 
ness to  give  an  outline  of  the  former  of  these  topics  in  the 
present  place. 

On  the  21st  of  May,  1644,  Mr.  Rutherford  moved  for  the 
speeding  of  the  directopy  for  public  worship,  to  which  no 
aitention  had  hitherto  been  paid.  In  consequence  of  this 
motion,  Mr.  Palmer,  chairman  of  the  committee  appointed 
for  that  purpose,  gave  in  a  report  on  the  24th,  which 
brought  the  subject  fairly  before  the  Assembly.  Some 
little  difference  of  opinion  arose,  whether  any  other  person, 
except  the  minister,  might  read  the  Scriptures  in  the  time 
ofpublic  vrorship,  which  terminated  in  the  occasional  permis- 
sion of  probationers.  But  when  the  subject  of  the  dispensa- 
tion of  the  Lord's  Supper  came  under  discussion,  it  gave  rise 
to  a  sharp  and  protracted  debate,  chiefly  between  the  Inde- 
pendents and  the  Scottish  Commissioners.  The  Indepen- 
dents opposed  the  arrangement  of  the  communicants,  as 
seated  at  the  communion  table,  it  being  the  custom  among 
them  for  the  people  to  remain  in  their  pews  ,  while  the 
Scottish  members  urgently  defended  tlie  proposed  method 

•   Riishworth,  vol.  v.  p.  780. 

t  Ibid.,  vol.  V,  p.  781.  The  names  of  the  Assembly  divines  were, 
I)is.  Burgess  and  Gouge,  Messrs.  Walker,  Conant,  Cawdry,  Calamy, 
Chambers,  Ley,  Gower,  and  Roborough.  The  city  ministers  were, 
Messrs.  Dovvnham,  Dod,  Clendon,  Bourne,  Roberts,  Ofl'spring,  Crau- 
ford,  Clarke,  Billcrs,  Cooke,  Lee,  Horton,  and  Jackson.  A  similar 
committee  was  alsu  appointed  for  the  county  of  Lancaster. —  Neal,  vol 
ii.  p.  273. 


i54  HISTORY  OF  THE 

of  seating  themselves  at  the  same  table.  Another  disputed 
point  was,  with  regard  to  the  power  of  the  minister  to  ex. 
elude  io-norant  or  scandalous  persons  from  communion. 
The  debates  on  these  points  occupied  the  Assembly  from 
the  lOih  of  June  to  the  10th  of  July.  The  directory  for 
the  sacrament  of  baptism  was  also  the  subject  of  conside- 
rable debate,  continued  from  the  11th  July  to  the  8th  of 
August.  The  directory  for  the  sanctificalion  of  the  Sab- 
bath was  readily  received  ;  and  a  committee  was  appointed 
to  procure  a  preface  for  the  completed  directory  for  pub- 
lic worship.  This  committee  consisted  of  Messrs.  Good- 
win, Nye,  Bridge,  Burgess,  Reynolds,  Vines,  Marshall,  and 
Dr.  Temple,  together  "with  the  Scottish  ministers.  The 
appointment  of  so  many  of  the  Independents  was  for  the 
purpose  of  avoiding  any  renewal  of  the  protracted  con- 
tentions in  which  they  had  so  long  held  the  Assembly,  as 
we  learn  from  Baillie.*  This  part  of  the  Assembly's  la- 
bors received  the  ratification  of  Parliament  on  the  22d  of 
November,  164-1  ;  with  the  exception  of  the  directions 
for  marriage  and  burial,  which  v/ere  finished  on  the  27th 
of  the  same  month,  and  soon  afterwards  the  wdiole  received 
the  full  ratification  of  Parliament. 

It  will  be  remembered  that  the  Assembly  of  Divines, 
when  required  by  Parliament  to  prepare  a  new  form  of 
government  and  discipline,  attempted  at  first  to  begin  and 
proceed  Vv'ith  their  task  in  a  manner  strictly  systematic 
and  logical,  commencing  with  Christ,  the  Divine  Head  of 
the  Church,  who  possesses  all  power  and  all  offices  by  way 
of  eminency  in  Himself;  from  that  they  proceeded  to  men- 
tion the  various  kind  of  Church-officers  wdio  are  named  in 
the  Scriptures,  and  to  define  the  nature  of  their  official 
powers  and  duties,  intending  to  complete  this  part  before 
undertaking  any  other.  But  they  were  turned  aside  from 
the  systematic  course  of  procedure,  partly  by  the  urgency 
of  the  Parliament's  desire  to  obtain  a  directory  for  ordina- 
tion to  supply  vacant  charges  ;  and  partly  by  their  own 
wish  to  avoid  the  discussion  of  controverted  topics  till 
they  should  have  agreed  on  as  many  as  possible.  Even  in 
these  preliminary  steps,  however,  they  came  into  contact 
with  several  points  which  led  to  keen  debates  between  the 
Intleivendent  and  the  Presbyterian  parties,  proving  but  too 
*  Baillie,  vol.  ii.  p.  242. 


WKSTMIXSTRR    ASSEMBLY.  155 

plainly,  that  a  full  agreement  was  scarcely  to  be  expected. 
For  a  time  the  Scottish  commissioners  strove  to  act  the 
part  of  peace-makers,  and  repeatedly  moved  to  avoid  dis- 
putable topics,  and  to  direct  their  attention  chiefly  to  those 
on  which  all  micrht  be  united.  As  tiie  subjects  on  which 
they  were  engaged  advanced,  this  became  impracticable, 
Biid  all  parties  prepared  for  the  struggle.  On  the  19th  of 
January,  ]6i4<,  Dr.  Burgess  reported  from  the  first  commit- 
tee, who  were  to  draw  up  the  propositions  concerning  Pres- 
bytery in  the  following  terms: — *' 1.  That  the  Scripture 
holdelh  out  a  Presbytery  in  a  Church,  1  Tim.  iv.  14;  Acts 
XV.  2,  4,  6.  2.  That  a  Presbytery  consisteth  of  ministers 
of  the  Word,  and  such  other  public  officers  as  have  been 
already  voted  to  have  a  share  in  the  government  in  the 
Church."* 

Tiie  subject  having  been  thus  brought  forward  in  the 
Assembly  in  the  due  order  of  procedure,  the  Scottish  com- 
missioners prepared  a  book  containing  an  outline  of  the 
P.esbyterial  form  of  Church  government,  as  it  already 
existed  in  Scotland,  and  caused  a  copy  of  it  to  be  given 
to  each  member  of  Assembly.  They  also  prepared  a  paper 
containing  a  brief  statement  of  the  chief  heads  of  Church 
government,  which  having  been  laid  before  the  Grand 
Committee,  was  by  them  transmitted  to  the  Assembly  for 
their  consideration.  It  was  to  the  following  effect : — 
"Assemblies  are  fourfold,  1.  Elderships  of  particular  con- 
gregations; 2.  Classical  Presbyteries;  3.  Provincial  Sy- 
nods; 4.  National  Assemblies.  Elderships  particular  are 
warranted:  1.  By  Christ's  institution.  Matt,  xviii.  17  ;  2. 
By  the  common  light  of  nature  ;  3.  By  unavoidable  neces- 
sity. Classical  Presbyteries  are  warrantable  :  I.  By  Christ's 
institution,  Matt,  xviii.  17;  2.  By  the  example  of  the  Apos- 
tolic (-'hurches — instancing  in  the  Church  of  Jerusalem, 
Antioch,  Ephesus,  Corinth,  Rome,  &c."t  These  proposi- 
tions were  given  to  the  committee  which  was  intrusted 
with  the  preparation  of  all  matters  connected  with  Pres- 
bytery, as  the  proper  channel  through  which  they  might 
again  be  brought  forward  in  the  Assembly  ;  not,  however, 
without  some  opposition,  both  from  the  Independents  and 
from  Selden.  This  took  place  on  the  25th  of  January; 
and  on  the  27th  of  the  same  month,  Lord  Wharton  report- 

*  Liihtloot,  p.  llo.  t  Lightfoot,  p.  119. 


156  HISTORY    OF    THE 

cd  from  the  House  of  Lords,  that  a  person  named  Ogle, 
formerly  a  royalist  officer,  at  that  time  a  prisoner,  had 
been  detected  holding  correspondence  with  Lord  Bristol, 
expressing  his  hopes  that  a  large  party  of  the  Parliament's 
adherents  might  be  induced  to  join  the  king,  "  if  the  mode- 
rate Protestant  and  the  fiery  Independent  could  be  brought 
to  withstand  the  Presbyterian."*  His  Lordship  produced, 
at  the  same  time,  letters  from  the  Earl  of  Bristol,  encour- 
aging the  scheme  of  bringing  in  the  Independents  to  the 
support  of  the  royal  cause.  In  this  plot  the  Independents 
in  the  Assembly  do  not  appear  to  have  been  directly  impli- 
cated ;  for  Nye  and  Goodwin  assisted  in  its  detection,  by 
obtaining  permission  to  hold  private  intercourse  with  Ogle, 
and  to  seem  to  consent  to  his  proposals,  with  the  view  of 
ascertaining  their  full  extent  and  nature. f  Although  the 
Assembly  Independents  were  vindicated  from  participation 
in  this  plot,  yet  a  certain  amount  of  suspicion  rested  on 
the  party  in  general,  which,  together  with  the  points  of  dif- 
ference already  stated,  and  those  on  the  brink  of  being 
brought  forward,  seem  to  have  induced  them  to  adopt  a 
course  which  proved  exceedingly  pernicious,  so  far  as 
regarded  the  prospect  of  arriving  at  ultimate  unanimity. 

About  the  end  of  January,  or  the  beginning  of  February, 
1644,  they  published  a  treatise,  termed  "  An  Apologetical 
Narration,  humbly  submitted  to  the  Honorable  Houses  of 
Parliament,  by  Thomas  Goodwin,  Philip  Nye,  Sidrach 
Simpson,  Jeremiah  Burroughs,  William  Bridge."  The 
date  on  the  title-page  is  1643;  but  the  Parliamentary  year 
commenced  on  the  25th  of  March,  according  to  the  English 
computation  ;  and  Baillie  mentions  this  treatise  as  newly 
published,  in  a  letter  dated  the  18th  of  February,  1644,  he 
dating  the  beginning  of  the  year  from  January,  as  had  been 
the  custom  in  Scotland  from  the  year  1600.  The  language 
of  Baillie  is  very  pointed  respecting  this  production.  "At 
last,"  says  he,  "foreseeing  they  behoved  ere  long  to  come 
to  the  point,  they  put  out,  in  print,  on  a  sudden,  an  Apolo- 
getical Narration  of  their  way,  which  long  had  lain  ready 
beside  them,  wherein  they  petition  the  Parliament,  in  a 
most  sly  and  cunning  way,  for  a  toleration  ;  and  withal 
lend  too  bold  wipes  to  all  the  reformed  Churches,  as  imper- 
fect yet  in  their  reformation,  till  their  new  model  be  em* 
•  Lightfoot,  p.  128.  t  Baillie,  vol.  ii.  p.  137. 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBLY.  157 

braced."'*     BailUc  further  insinuates,  that  the  appearance 
of  the  treatise  was  "  by  some  n>en  intended  to  contribute 
to  the  very  wicked  plot  at  that  same  instant  a-working,  but 
shortly   after    discovered    almost    miraculously."      If  this 
conjecture  be  correct,  the  intercourse  of  Nye  and  Good- 
win with  Ogle  may  have  been  for  the  purpose  of  conceal- 
ncr  their  Oivn  connection  with  the  plof,  rather  than  to  aid 
in^its  complete  detection.     We  are  not,  however,  desirous 
to  fix  upon   them  a  larger  amount   of  criminality,  as  con- 
ducting dark  and  treacherous  intrigues,  than  can  be  main- 
tained by  the  clearest  and  most   irresistible  evidence,  and 
therefore  shall  not  at  once  adopt  the  suggestion  of  Baillie. 
The  publication  of  this  treatise,  the  "  Apologetical  Nar- 
ration," by  the  Independents,  tended  greatly  to  prevent  the 
probability  of  any  amicable  arrangement  in  which  all  par- 
ties might  asrree.     Till   that  time   nothing   had  been  done 
which   foreclosed   the  possible  adjustment  of  at    least  all 
minor  differences;  and  the  Scottish  divines,  in   particular, 
had  striven  to  avoid  the  premature  determination  of  points 
disputed  by  the   Independents.     But   when  they  had  thus 
carried  the  controversy  away  from  the  Assembly  to   the 
Parliament,  and  had,  by  publishing  this  work,  laid  it  before 
the  world,  it  became  almost   morally   impossible   that  any 
accommodated   adjustment  could   take   place,  each   party 
feelino-  bound  in  honor  to  make  out  its   own  cause,  and  to 
adhere  pertinaciously  to  the  views  thus  publicly  declared. 
It  may  be  remarked  also,  that  the  Scottish  commissioners 
had  always  caused  their  publications  to  be  laid  before  the 
Assembly,  so  as  to  render  them  fairly  the  subjects  of  dis- 
cussion ;  whereas  the  Independents   addressed  their  pro- 
duction to  the  Parliament,  and  published  it  to  the  commu- 
nity,  without   formally  giving   copies    to   the    Assembly  ,* 
so  that,  whatever  might  be  thought,  the  subject  could  not, 
without  violation  of  order  and  propriety,  be  taken  up  and 
debated  there.     This,  of  course,  led  to  the  publication  of  a 
series  of  answers,  in  which,  as   usual,  each  disputant  was 
more  eager  to  confute  his  antagonist  than  to  promote  peace 
and  harmony.  From  that  time  forward  the  contest  between 
the   Independents    and   the  Presbyterians  became  one  of 
irreconcihble  rivalry,  to  which  the  utter  defeat  of  the  one 
or  the  other  was  the  only  possible  termination.     And  his- 
•  Baillie,  vol.  ii.  p.  130. 
U 


158  HISTORY    OF    THK 

toricnl  truth  compels  us  to  say,  that  as  this  bitter  warfare 
was  beg-un  by  the  Independents,  they  are  justly  chargeable 
with  all  the  consequences  of  the  fatal  feud. 

The  "  Apologetical  Narration"  is,  in  many  points  of 
view^,  a  remarkable  production.  Though  it  extends  to  no 
more  than  thirty-one  pages  of  small  quarto,  it  contains  a 
very  plausible  account  of  the  history  of  the  five  Independent 
divines,  the  peculiar  tenets  of  Church  government  which 
they  held,  and  their  objections  against  the  Presbyterian 
system,  so  expressed  as  both  to  convey  a  highly  favorable 
view  of  themselves  and  their  opinions  to  Parliament,  and 
to  the  public,  and  to  serve  as  the  vehicle  of  skilfully  con- 
structed adulation  to  Parliament  itself.  The  treatise  begins 
by  complaining  of  the  accusations  which  were  generally 
urged  "  (though  not  expressly  directed  against  us  in  parti- 
cular, yet  in  the  interpretation  of  the  most  reflecting  on 
us),"  by  which  they  had  been  awakened  and  enforced  to 
anticipate  a  little  that  discovery  of  themselves  which 
otherwise  they  had  resolved  to  have  left  to  time  and  ex- 
perience, of  their  Avays  and  spirits.  They  present  them- 
selves, therefore,  "  to  the  supreme  judicatory  of  this  king- 
dom, which  is  and  hath  been  in  all  times  the  most  just  and 
severe  tribunal  for  guiltiness  to  appear  before,  much  more 
to  dare  to  appeal  unto ;  and  yet,  withal,  the  most  sacred 
refuge  and  asylum  for  mistaken  and  misjudged  innocence." 
They  then  mention  that  most  of  them  had  enjoyed  stations 
in  the  ministry  ten  years  before,  which  they  had  been  con- 
strained to  abandon  in  consequence  of  the  corruptions  in 
the  public  worship  and  government  of  the  Church.  Hav- 
ing been  compelled  first  to  look  at  the  dark  -part^  as  they 
term  it,  or  the  actually  existing  evils,  v/bich  forced  them 
to  exile,  they  next  began  to  inquire  into  and  examine  the 
rts;ht  part^  or  the  positive  part  of  Ch  jroii  worship  and  gov- 
ernment,, as  stated  in  the  apostolic  diiections,  and  the 
examples  of  the  primitive  New  Testamnit  Churches.  "  In 
this  inquiry,"  say  they,  "  we  looked  upon  the  Word  of 
Christ  as  impartially  and  unprejudicedly  as  men  made  of 
flesh  and  blood  are  like  to  do  in  any  juncture  of  time  that 
may  fall  out." — "We  had  no  new  commonwealths  to  rear, 
to  iVame  Church  government  unto  (a  hint  for  the  Erastians), 
whereof  any  one  piece  might  stand  in  the  other's  light,  to 
cause  the  least  variation  bj  us  from  the  primitive  pattern  j 


.WEST^ITNSTER    ASSEMBLY.  159 

we  had  no  state  ends  or  political  interests  to  comply  with : 
no  kincrdoms  in  our  eye  to  subdue  unto  our  mould,  which 
yet  will  be  co-existent  with  the  peace  of  any  civil  govern- 
ment on  earth  ;  no  preferment  of  worldly  respects  to  shape 
our  opinions  for:  We  had  nothing  else  to  do  but  simply 
and  singly  to  consider  how  to  worship  God  acceptably, 
and  so  most  according  to  his  word."*  These  good  men 
do  not  seem  to  have  perceived,  that  a  precisely  similar 
course  of  reasoning,  in  a  closely  similar  condition,  led  to 
the  erroneous  conclusions  of  the  ascetic  and  monastic 
orders  in  the  early  ages  of  Christianity,  nothing  being  more 
common  than  for  men  to  spring  from  one  extreme  into 
that  which  is  most  directly  and  remotely  opposite.  And  it 
will  be  observed  that  there  is  an  allusion  to  the  usual  charge 
brought  against  the  Scottish  Covenanters,  which  it  would 
have  been  more  in  accordance  with  the  spirit  of  charity  and 
peace  not  to  have  made. 

They  next  proceed  to  point  out  the  advantages  which 
they  enjoyed  from  the  writings  of  the  non-conformists, — • 
the  errors  of  the  Separatists  or  Brownists, — the  example 
of  other  reformed  Churches,  and  particularly  the  example 
of  their  expatriated  countrymen  in  New  England.  As  if 
to  prove  that  t'hey  were  not  men  of  unaccommodating 
tempers,  and  rigid  sectarian  spirit,  they  admit  that  even  in 
the  worst  times  of  the  Church  of  England,  "multitudes  of 
the  assemblies  and  parochial  congregations  thereof  were 
the  true  churches  and  body  of  Christy  and  the  ministry  thereof 
a  true  minv^try'''^  (the  i/alic9  are  in  the  work  itself)  ;  "  and 
that  they  both  had  held,  and  would  hold,  communion 
with  them  as  the  churches  of  Christ."  Mention  is  also 
made  of  the  friendly  terms  in  which  they  had  lived  with 
the  National  Presbyterian  Church  of  Holland,  as  a  further 
proof  of  their  truly  Christian  liberality  of  spirit. 

Having  given  this  general  view  of  their  own  feelings, 
they  proceed  to  state  briefly  the  way  and  practices  of 
their  churches,  which,  accordingly,  we  quote  in  their  own 
words:  "  Our  public  worship  was  made  of  no  other  parts 
than  the  worship  of  all  other  Keformed  Churches  doth  con- 
sist of:  As  public  and  solemn  prayers  for  kings  and  all  in 
authority,  &,c., — the  reading  the  Scriptures  of  the  Old  aud 
New  Testament,  exposition  of  them  as  occasion  wa3  ,*  <tad 
*  Apologetical  Narration,  pp.  3,  4, 


i()0  HISTORY    OF    THE 

constant  preaching  of  the  Word,  the  administration  of  th* 
two  sacraments,  baptism  to  infants,  the  Lord's  Supper, 
singing  of  Psalms,  collections  for  the  poor,  &c.,  everj> 
Lord's  day.  For  officers  and  public  rulers  in  the  Church, 
we  set  up  no  other  but  the  very  same  which  the  Reformed 
Churches  judge  necessary  and  sufficient,  and  as  instituted 
by  Christ  and  his  apostles  for  the  perpetual  government  of 
his  Church,  that  is,  pastors,  teachers,  ruhng  elders  (with 
us  not  lay,  but  ecclesiastical  persons  separated  to  that  ser- 
vice) and  deacons.  And  for  the  matter  of  government 
and  censures  of  the  Church,  we  had  not  executed  any  other 
but  what  all  acknowledge,  namely,  admonition  and  exconi' 
municafion  upon  obstinacy  and  impenitency  (which  wo 
bless  God  we  never  exercised).  Ihis  latter  we  judged 
should  be  put  in  execution  for  no  other  kind  of  sins  than 
may  evidently  be  presumed  to  be  perpetrated  against  the 
party's  known  light.  We  had  these  three  principles  more 
especially  in  our  eye  to  guide  and  steer  our  practice  by, — 
first,  the  supreme  xw\e  without  us  was  the  primitive  pattern 
and  example  of  the  churches  erected  by  the  apostles. 
A  second  principle  we  carried  along  with  us  in  all  our 
resolutions  was,  Not  to  make  our  present  judgment  and 
practice  a  binding  law  unto  ourselves  for  the  future,  which 
we  in  like  manner  made  continual  profession  of  upon  all 
occasions  ;  which  principle  we  wish  were  (next  to  that 
most  supreme,  namely,  to  be  in  all  things  guided  by  the 
perfect  will  of  God)  enacted  as  the  most  sacred  law  of  all 
other,  in  the  midst  of  all  other  laws  and  canons  ecclesias- 
tical in  Christian  States  and  Churches  throughout  the 
world.  Thirdly,  we  are  able  to  hold  forth  this  true  and 
just  apology  unto  the  world,  that  in  the  matters  of  greatest 
moment  and  controversy,  all  still  chose  to  practise  safely, 
and  so  as  we  had  reason  to  judge  that  all  sorts,  or  the  most 
of  all  the  churches  did  acknowledge  warrantable,  although 
they  make  additaments  thereunto." 

In  order  to  explain  what  they  mean  by  these  additaments^ 
they  proceed  to  say, — "  For  instance  :  Avhereas  one  great 
controversy  of  these  times  is  about  the  qualification  of  the 
members  of  churches  and  the  promiscuous  receiving  and 
mixture  of  good  and  bad  ;  therein  we  chose  the  better  part, 
and  to  be  sure,  received  in  none  but  such  as  all  the 
churches  in  the  world,  by  the  balance  of  the  sanctuary,  ac« 


WESTMINSTEi;     ASSRMI5LV.  161 

knowledge;  faithful."  With  regard  to  Church  government^ 
after  referring  to  the  Preshyterian  system  at  that  time  pre- 
valent in  all  the  Reformed  Churches,  except  that  of  Eng- 
land, they  say, — "  We  could  not  but  judge  it  a  safe  and  an 
allowed  way  to  retain  the  government  of  our  several  con- 
gregations for  matters  of  discipline  within  themselves,  to 
be  exercised  by  their  own  elders,  whereof  we  had  (for  the 
m  jst  part  of  the  time  we  were  abroad)  three  at  least  in 
each  congregation  whom  we  were  subject  to ;  yet  not 
claiming  to  ourselves  an  independent  power  in  every  congre- 
gation, to  give  account,  or  be  subject  to  none  others,  but 
Oiily  a  full  and  entire  power,  complete  within  ourselves, 
until  we  should  be  challenged  to  err  grossly."  To  meet  the 
objection,  that  such  a  system  afforded  no  remedy  for  mis- 
conduct in  any  erring  congregation,  they  state,  that  when 
one  church  gives  oflence  to  others,  they  ought  to  submit 
to  trial  and  examination  by  those  offended,  and  if  the 
offending  church  should  persist  in  their  error,  then  the 
others  are  "  to  pronounce  that  heavy  sentence  against  them, 
of  withdrawing  and  renouncing  all  Christian  communion 
with  them  until  they  do  repent."  This  sentence  of  non- 
communion^  as  they  term  it,  is  what  they  meant  by  excom- 
municntion  ;  and  as  its  efficiency  was  questioned,  they  saj"", 
in  answer  to  such  an  objection  :  "  And  if  the  magistrate's 
power  (to  w^hich  we  give  as  much,  and,  as  we  think,  more 
than  the  principles  of  the  Presbyterial  government  will 
suffer  them  to  yield;  do  but  assist  and  back  the  sentence 
of  other  churches  denouncing  this  non-communion  against 
churches  miscarrying,  according  to  the  nature  of  the  crime, 
as  they  judge  meet,  and  as  they  would  the  sentence 
ot'  cliurches  excommunicating  other  churches  in  such 
cases,  upon  their  own  particular  judgment  of  the  cause  ; 
ther),  without  all  controversy,  this,  our  way  of  church  pro- 
ceeding, will  be  everyway  as  effectual  as  their  other  can  be 
s  ipposed  to  be." 

A  short  narrative  is  then  given  of  the  way  in  which  they 
had  succeeded  in  terminating  a  dispute  which  had  occur- 
red among  them  while  in  Holland ;  but  strict  truth  con- 
strains us  to  say,  that  their  narrative  is  by  no  means  of  an 
impartial  character;  and  as  the  whole  facts  of  the  case 
were  well  known  to  many  of  the  Assembly  Divines,  from 
their  intercourse  with  the  Netherlands,  they  could  not  fail 


16'2  IIISTO;iV    OF    THE 

to  be  displeased  wiih  this  apologetic  account  of  the  aiTair 
The  relation  goes  on  to  suggest,  in  a  tone  of  considerable 
self-complacency,  that  though  the  Reformed  Churches  had 
made  considerable  progress,  yet  it  seemed  likely  that  a 
much  more  perfect  reformation  might  be  obtained,  mani- 
festly implying  that  this  would  best  be  accomplished  by 
following  their  model.  Again  complaining  of  the  re- 
proaches and  calumnies  which  they  had  endured,  they 
mention,  as  among  them,  "  That  proud  and  insolent  title  of 
Independency  was  affixed  unto  us,  as  our  claim,  the  very 
sound  of  which  conveys  to  all  men's  apprehensions  the 
challenge  of  an  exemption  of  all  churches  from  all  subjec- 
tion and  dependence,  or  rather  a  trumpet  of  defiance 
against  whatever  power,  spiritual  or  civil,  which  we  do  ab- 
hor and  detest:  Or  else,  the  odious  name  of  Brownism^ 
together  with  all  their  opinions  as  they  have  stated  and 
maintained  them,  must  needs  be  owned  by  us  ;  although 
upon  the  very  first  declarin-of  our  judgments  in  the  chief 
and  fundamental  point  of  all  Church  discipline,  and  like- 
wise since,  it  hath  been  acknowledged  that  we  differ  much 
from  them.  And  we  did  then,  and  do  here  publicly  profess, 
vve  believe  the  truth  to  lie  and  consist  in  a  middle  way  be- 
twixt that  which  is  falsely  charged  on  us,  Brownism  ;  and 
that  which  is  the  contention  of  these  times,  the  authorila- 
tive  Preshyte.ridl  govermnent  in  all  the  subordinations  and 
proceedings  of  it.'  * 

After  a  few  more  general  declarations  respecting  their 
own  "  peaceable  practices,"  and  "  constant  forbearance" 
in  the  midst  of  many  provocations,  and  their  resolution  to 
bear  all  "  with  a  quiet  and  strong  patience,"  they  intimate 
their  intention  to  decline  further  controversy,  reservinof 
the  declaration  and  defence  of  their  opinions  to  the  Assem- 
bly. They  declare  also  their  full  agreement  with  the  As- 
sembly in  all  points  of  doctrine  that  had  yet  been  discussed  ; 
and  their  wish  to  yield  in  matters  of  discipline,  in  which 
alone  they  had  yet  differed,  to  the  utmost  latitude  of  their 
ligi'it  and  consciences.  And  finally,  they  conclude  their 
Apologetical  Narration,  by  beseeching  the  Parliament  to 
regard  them  as  men,  who,  if  they  cannot  be  promoters, 
have  no  wish  to  be  hinderers  of  further  reformation  ;  who 
differ  less  from  the  Reformed  Churches  and  their  brethrer; 
•  Apol.  Nar.,  pp.  23   24. 


WKS'TMI.NSTI-R     ASSEMBLY.  163 

than  they  do  from  what  themselves  were  three  years  past., 
who  have  long  been  exiles  and  are  now  sufferers  of 
reproach  ;  and  who  pursue  no  other  design  but  a  subsist- 
ence, be  it  the  poorest  and  meanest  in  their  own  land,  with 
the  enjoyment  of  the  ordinances  of  Christ,  and  with  the 
allowance  of  a  latitude  to  some  le^^ser  differences  with 
jeaceableness,  as  not  knowing  where  else  with  safety, 
health,  and  livelihood,  to  set  their  feet  on  earth. 

The  publication  of  this  Apologetical  Narrative  operated 
instantaneously  like  a  declaration  of  war.  A  number  of 
answers  almost  immediately  appeared,  various  in  talent, 
learning,  and  power,  but  at  least  sufficiently  keen  and 
pointed.  Even  the  calm,  plausible,  and  stately  tone  of  the 
Narrative  tended  to  provoke  their  antagonists  to  the  use 
of  undue  asperity  ;  for  they  regarded  it  as  an  attempt  to 
recommend  their  own  system,  and  disparage  others,  by 
means  of  careful  concealments,  plausible  evasions,  and 
alluring  insinuations  of  its  accommodating  nature,  skilfully 
contrasted  with  hints  and  suggestions  of  an  unfavorable 
kind  respecting  the  character  and  tendency  of  the  Presby- 
terian form  of  Church  government  and  discipline.  For 
this  reason  many  seemed  to  think  that  the  Narration  was 
not  merely  to  be  answered,  but  assailed  with  vehemence 
and  indignation.  In  this,  although  the  temptation  was 
great,  they  certainly  erred,  and  erred  grievously ;  both 
because  such  a  method  is  not  likely  to  disarm  hostility,  or 
remove  prejudice,  and  because  it  seemed  to  prove  that  the 
charge  of  intolerance,  so  frequently  urged  against  them, 
Avas  but  too  well  founded.  Let  it,  however,  be  observed, 
that  none  of  the  Scottish  divines  entered  warmly  into  this 
controversy,  although  the  Independents  had  alluded  to 
them  in  a  manner  sufficiently  ungracious.  Baillie,  indeed, 
speaks  of  them  with  considerable  severity  in  some  parts 
of  his  letters  ;  and  the  view  which  he  gives  of  their  system 
in  his  "Dissuasive,"  is  certainly  not  such  as  would  gratify 
its  adherents  ;  and  Rutherford  did  not  hesitate  to  encounter 
them  in  fair  argument,  in  several  of  his  works,  but  without 
any  asperity  of  temper,  or  harshness  of  language.  They 
were  answered  by  Mr,  Herle,  in  his  treatise  em  tied  "The 
Independency  upon  Scripture  of  the  Independency  of 
Churches; '  and  he  also  retained  a  dignified  and  Christian- 
like  calmness  of  spirit  and  manner.     But  other  antagonists 


164»  HISTORY   OF  THE 

kept  no  such  terms.  Dr.  Bastwick,  Mr.  Vicars,  and  Mr, 
Kdwards,  assailed  the  Narration  with  not  less  keenness  of 
expression  than  strength  of  argument.  Of  these  answers 
the  most  elaborate  was  that  entitled  "  Antapologia  ;  or,  a 
Full  Answer  to  the  Apologetical  Narration  ;  by  Thomas 
Edwards,"  extending  to  259  pages  of  small  quarto,  and 
embracing  every  disputed  or  suggested  topic.  It  will 
scarcely  be  denied,  by  those  who  have  carefully  perused 
the  Antapologia,  that  it  furnishes  a  very  ample  and  strong, 
but  most  ungracious  refutation  of  the  main  positions  taken 
up  by  the  authors  of  the  Apologetical  Narration.  No  for- 
mal reply  was  returned  by  the  Independents  to  the  Anta- 
pologia ;  but  Mr.  Burroughs  some  time  afterwards  published 
a  vindication  of  himself  from  some  of  the  charges  that  had 
been  urged  against  him.  To  that  vindication  we  may  have 
occasion  to  refer  subsequently,  for  another  purpose. 

Instead,  therefore,  of  tracing  the  Antapologia,  and  ex- 
tracting its  statements,  it  may  be  enough  to  advert  to 
some  of  the  main  points  in  which  it  answered  the  Nar- 
ration. It  is  proved  clearly  by  facts,  that  the  Independent 
bretbren  had  not  been  such  silent  and  retiring  men  as  they 
represented  themselves  to  have  been ;  but  that,  on  the 
contrary,  they  had  been  very  active  in  endeavoring  to  re- 
commend and  spread  their  own  views  as  widely  as  possi- 
ble ;  that  in  reality  all  their  principles,  of  which  they 
spoke  as  in  a  great  measure  discovered  by  themselves,  in 
their  own  study  of  the  Scriptures,  bad  been  previously 
promulgated  and  acted  upon  by  others  ;  that,  in  effect, 
their  boasted  theory  of  non-comm.union  had  not  been  found 
adequate  to  the  maintenance  of  peace  among  them,  and 
had  but  very  imperfectly  answered  the  end  in  the  case  to 
which  they  referred  as  a  practical  instance  of  its  sufficien- 
cy ;  th:it  they  had  not  experienced  any  peculiar  hardships 
either  before  or  during  their  exile  ;  and  that,  since  their 
return,  they  had  enjoyed  comfort,  influence,  and  honor,  at 
least  eqiia^  •  that  which  any  of  the  Presbyterians  had  ob- 
tained. The  insinuations  against  the  Presbyterian  system 
were  shown  to  be  invidious  aud  unfounded,  and  were  very 
sharply  retorted  against  themselves  and  their  course  of 
procedure  ;  and  their  practice  in  "  gathering  churches  out 
of  churches,"  was  shown  to  be  contrary  to  their  own  de- 
clarations as  members   of  the  Westminster  Assembly.     It 


WESTMINSTER  ASSEMBLY.  165 

was  proved,  al^o,  that  they  maintairieti  a  more  intimate  in- 
tercourse with  the  Brownists  and  other  Sectarians  than 
they  were  willing  to  admit;  and  were  engag-ed  in  a  series 
of  intrigues,  which  they  were  anxious  to  conceal.  All 
these  points  appear  to  be  proved  in  the  Antapologia  by  a 
strength  and  minuteness  of  evidence  which  could  not  be 
set  aside,  and  which  they  did  not  attempt  to  meet.  But 
there  was  so  much  of  a  fiercely  hostile  spirit  displayed  by 
Edwards,  that  his  attack  recoiled  somewhat  upon  himself, 
and  diminished  considerably  the  value  of  his  production, 
wliile  it  furnished  a  kind  of  excuse  for  his  antagonists  in 
abstaining  from  giving  a  direct  answer. 

Such  was  the  first  direct  outbreak  of  the  controversy 
between  the  Independents  and  the  Presbyterians, — a  con- 
troversy greatly  to  be  deplored,  as  having  proved  ulti- 
mately the  main  cause  wdiy  the  Westminster  Assembly 
failed  to  accomplish  all  the  good  wliich  had  been  expected 
from  its  important  deliberations.  Viewed  as  a  theological 
controversy  alone,  it  contained  but  few,  and  these  not  vi- 
tally important  elements.  There  was  no  disagreement  be- 
tween the  two  parties  in  matters  of  doctrine  ;  they  both 
admitted  the  same  orders  of  office-bearers  in  the  Church, 
though  the  Independents  would  have  recognized  more 
than  the  Presbyterians  thought  either  necessary  or  com- 
manded in  the  Scriptures;  and  they  differed  little  in  their 
opinions  respecting  the  powers  properly  inherent  in  con- 
gregations. But  tlie  Independents  refused  to  recognize 
the  Presbyterian  system  of  successive  Church  courts, — as 
presbyteries,  synods,  and  assemblies, — possessing  authori- 
tative jurisdiction  over  those  immediately  beneath  them, 
though  they  were  willing  to  admit  the  advantage  of 
synods,  in  cases  of  difficulty,  to  the  opinions  of  which 
great  respect  would  be  due,  but  not  subjection  and  neces- 
sary obedience. 

The  point,  however,  on  which  the  greatest  disagreement 
existed,  was  that  relating  to  the  ideas  which  they  attached 
to  the  term,  Church.  In  their  view,  each  company  of 
believers,  though  not  more  than  seven  in  number,  form?  ri 
church,  complete  in  itself,  and  in  no  respect  subordinate 
to,  or  requiring  the  aid  ef,  any  other  church.  Such  a 
church  might,  at  its  first  formation,  be  entirely  without 
pastors,  elders,  or  church-officers  of  any  kind ;    but  hav- 


166  IIISTORV  OF    THE 

ing  met  together,  and  made  a  solemn  declaration  of  faith, 
and  entered  into  a  mutual  church-covenant,  they  imme- 
diately became  possessed  of  such  inherent  powers  as  to 
entitle  them,  to  choose  and  ordain  all  necessary  church- 
officers,  without  the  presence  or  the  intervention  of  any 
pastor  previously  ordained.  Other  pastors  mi.ght  indeed 
be  present,  but  their  presence  was  not  necessary  to  the 
validity  of  the  ordination  conferred.  In  the  same  manner, 
the  congregation  of  ordinary  members  might  censure  or 
depose  their  office-bearers,  and  choose  and  ordain  new 
ones  whenever  they  thought  proper  ;  and  if  the  office- 
bearers did  not  readiljr  submit  and  become  private  mem- 
bers aoain,  the  congfreo^ation  were  entitled  to  withdraw  from 
communion  with  them  altogether,  and  to  reconstruct  their 
system  as  at  first.  Against  such  proceedings  no  appeal  could 
be  taken  to  any  other  authority,  each  congregation  pos- 
sessing all  power  in  itself,  and  being  free  to  have  recourse  to 
the  principle  of  non-communion  in  any  case,  though  against 
the  whole  Christian  Church.  Even  when  thus  stated,  the 
dijTerence  between  the  Independent  and  the  Presbyterian 
systems  may  be  brought  Avithin  a  very  narrow  compass. 
The  Presbyterians  never  denied  that  a  company  of  trtie 
believers  might  be  a  true  church,  though  destitute  of  pas- 
tors ;  nor  that  they  might  select  the  most  grave  and  pious 
of  their  number,  and  set  him  solemnly  apart  to  the  office  of 
the  ministry,  without  the  presence  of  any  ordained  pastor, 
if  in  circumstances  where  that  could  not  be  obtained. 
They  admitted  that  the  church  must  possess  in  itself  the 
power  of  all  that  is  necessary  to  the  continuation  of  its 
own  existence.  But  they  held,  also,  that  Christ  himself  at 
first  chose  and  appointed  office-bearers,  and  gave  to  them 
authority  to  ordain  others  ;  that  this  was  matter  of  pre- 
cept, and  to  be  regularly  obeyed  in  every  instance  v.hen 
that  was  possible,  because  it  had  been  so  commanded  ; 
while  they  regarded  the  Congregational  mode  as  a  matter 
oi  necessity,  justifiable  only  in  cases  where  without  it  the 
{:?njoyment  of  Christian  ordinances  could  not  be  obtained. 
1  ne  error  of  the  Independents  consisted  in  adopting  as  the 
ordinary  rule  the  case  of  necessity^  instead  of  the  method  of 
precept ;  and  in  adhering  so  pertinaciously  to  this  view  as 
10  condemn  and  refuse  to  admit  into  their  communion  all 
who  could  not  ao-ree  with  them. 


WESTMIiNSTKR    ASSf:.-MBLV.  IST 

It  was  a  necessary  consequence  of  this  essential  princi- 
ple, that  the  Independents  held  the  theory  of  admiltitig 
none  to  be  members  of  their  churches  except  those  whom 
they  believed  to  have  been  thoroughly  and  in  the  hisrhest 
sense  regenerated,  or,  in  the  language  of  the  time,  "  true 
saints,"  and  consequently,  perfectly  qualified  to  exercise 
rightly  all  the  high  and  sacred  functions  which  they  assert- 
ed to  belong  to  the  congregation,  as  in  itself  a  complete 
church.  For  the  same  reason,  they  necessarily  opposed 
the  idea  of  a  national  Church,  in  any  other  sense  than  as  a 
series  of  congregational  churches,  gathering  together  true 
believers  as  the  wheat,  and  leaving  the  chaff  to  its  fearful 
fate.  And  following  up  this  theory,  they  regarded  it  as 
perfectly  right  to  gather  churches  of  their  own  kind  out  of 
the  congregations  of  other  ministers — a  process  which 
necessarily  gave  great  offence  to  those  whose  congrega- 
tions they  thus  divided  and  led  away.  Nor  was  it  at  all 
strange  that  considerable  numbers  should  bcAviliing  to  join 
a  system  which  gave  such  irresponsible  power  to  ordinary 
Church  members  ;  and  which,  at  the  same  time,  certainly 
tended  to  encourage  the  feeling  of  spiritual  pride  in  those 
who,  in  being  admitted,  were  recognized  as  truly  regene- 
rated persons.  In  one  point  of  view  they  were,  to  a  cer- 
tain extent,  right.  It  must  always  be  desirable  that  Church 
members  should  be  real  believers,  and  that  Christian  com- 
munion should  be  enjoyed  by  none  but  true  believers  ;  but 
it  must  always  be  impossible  for  man,  who  cannot  read  the 
heart,  to  avoid  being  deceived  by  the  plausible  language 
and  manners  of  skilful  hypocrisy — and  therefore  it  was  im- 
possible for  the  Congregational  theory  to  be  fully  realized. 
And  at  the  same  time,  while  assuming  so  much  purity  and 
reality  in  its  members,  its  want  of  the  power  either  to  in- 
flict Church  censures  or  to  appeal  to  higher  authority,  ren- 
dered it  peculiarly  unable  to  preserve  that  very  purity  in 
u'hich  it  assumed  its  superiority  over  other  Churches  to 
consist.  Still  further,  by  placing  the  very  essence  of  its 
system  in  congregational  power,  it  necessarily  stood  close- 
ly allied,  in  theory  at  least,  with  all  the  multitudinous  sects 
with  which  that  period  was  so  prodigiously  rife — all  of 
which  were  perfectly  ready  to  maintain  the  sole  and  un- 
controllable power  of  separate  congregations ;  and  thus 
the   Independents  were  in  a  manner  compelled  to  become 


158  HISTORY  OF  THE 

the  head  sectarian  body,  and  to  defend  not  only  their  own 
religious  liberties,  but  also  the  liberty  claimed  by  the  most 
wild  and  monstrous  sects  to  hold  and  to  teach  errors  the 
most  immoral  and  blasphemous — of  which  they  by  no 
means  approved,  or  rather,  which  they  strongly  condemned, 
but  could  not  consistently  oppose.  They  were  thus  led  to 
advocate  a  toleration  in  theory  which  they  never  granted 
where  their  own  power  was  predominant,  as  in  New  Eng- 
land,— and  which,  it  may  be  added,  they  never  would  con- 
sent to  grant  to  the  Presbyterians,  whom  they  would  not 
admit  to  communion  with  them  unless  they  were  willing 
to  abandon  Presbyterianism,  and  become  Congregational- 
ists.  But  as  the  subject  of  toleration  was  scarcely  sug- 
gested in  the  Apologetical  Narration,  we  shall  postpone 
the  consideration  of  it  till  we  reach  the  period  when  it 
became  a  leading  element  of  controversy. 

All  the  topics  which  have  been  stated  above  were  known 
to  the  two  parties  of  Presbyterians  and  Independents  in  the 
Assembly,  before  the  publication  of  the  Apologetical  Nar- 
ration, and  several  of  them  had  casually  become  the  sub- 
ject of  debate;  but  there  had  been  considerable  forbear- 
ance on  both  sides,  arising  from  a  natural  and  laudable 
reluctance  to  anticipate  a  perhaps  unavoidable  contest. 
The  Scottish  divines,  in  particular,  had  repeatedly  inter- 
posed to  prevent  any  premature  discussion  of  debatable 
subjects,  and  had  recommended  as  much  accommodation 
to  the  views  of  the  Independents  as  was  consistent  with 
the  maintenance  of  principle.  And  although  the  allusions 
to  them  in  the  Apologetical  Narration  were  sufficiently 
ungracious  and  irritating,  they  were  in  no  haste  to  show 
resentment;  being  far  more  desirous  to  see  the  religious 
welfare  of  the  community  promoted  and  secured,  than  to 
vindicate  their  own  character  from  groundless  aspersions. 
But,  nevertheless,  the  publication  of  that  most  ill-omened 
production  caused  an  estrangement  which  was  never  fully 
removed,  and  led  to  a  degree  of  keenness  and  obstinacy  in 
all  the  subsequent  deliberations  of  the  Assembly,  whenever 
disputed  points  arose,  which  tended  greatly  both  to  retard 
their  proceedings  and  to  obscure  the  prospect  of  ultimate 
and  harmonious  success  in  their  great  work.  And  having 
thus  opened  the  subject  of  the  Independent  controversy, 
we  shall  now  proceed  to  trace  it,  according  to  the  course 
which  circumi^tanccs  led  it  to  pursue. 


WESTMINSTER  ASSEMBLY.  169 

After  some  preliminary  arrangements,  in  which  it  was 
agreed  that  the  Independents  should  bring  forward  their 
objections  to  the  proposition  of  the  committee,  the  subject 
was  formally  stated,  on  the  6th  February,  in  the  following 
terms  :— '  The  Scripture  holdeih  forth,  that  many  particu- 
lar congregations  may  be  under  one  presbyterial  govern- 
ment.'" 'liie  Independent  argument  against  this  proposi- 
tion was  stated  by  Mr.  Goodwin,  to  this  effect,  as  given  by 
Lightfoot: — "  If  many  elders  put  together  make  one  pres- 
bytery classical,  then  every  one  of  those  elders  is  to  be  re- 
puled  as  an  elder  to  every  one  of  those  churches  ;  but  the 
Word  of  God  does  not  warrant  any  such  thing."  In  proof 
of  the  minor  proposition  he  argued  thus: — ''  The  deacons 
are  not  to  be  officers  to  divers  churches,  therefore  not  the 
pastor;  the  pastor  is  not  to  preach  in  divers  churches, 
therefore  not  to  rule  ;  the  several  congregations  are  not 
to  give  honor  or  maintenance  to  the  pastor  of  another 
church  ;  one  pastor  was  not  chosen,  ordained,  and  main- 
tained by  diverse  churches,  therefore  not  to  have  power  ia 
them  ;  several  offices  are  not  to  meet  in  one  and  the  same 
person."*  It  will  be  observed,  that  this  argument  opposed 
Presbyterial  government  not  on  scriptural  grounds,  but  on 
the  supposed  incongruities  and  inconveniences  of  the  sys- 
tem ;  and  this  was  promptly  and  very  easily  met. 

Mr.  Vines,  in  answer  to  the  major  proposition,  replied, 
that  "What  belongs  to  the  whole,  as  such,  does  not  belong 
to  every  p;irt ;"  but  the  presbytery  is  an  aggregate  whole, 
and  so  are  the  churches  combined  under  this  presbytery ; 
therefore  the  relations  borne  by  the  presbytery  to  the 
church  of  its  bounds,  have  respect  to  the  aggregate  W'hole, 
and  do  not  interfere  with  the  peculiar  relations  which  the 
respective  pastors  and  congregations  bear  to  each  other. 
He  illustrated  his  argument  by  reference  to  the  original 
government  of  the  Hebrew  commonwealth,  where  the  heads 
of  the  tribes  governed  the  whole  community  ;  but  this  did 
not  alter  the  relation  between  the  head  of  each  tribe  and 
that  particular  tribe  ;  and  he  showed  that  the  Independent 
argument  might  be  retorted  against  their  own  system. 
Mr.  Marshall  began  by  proving  the  proposition  of  the  com- 
oj^ttee  : — That  the  whole  Church  is  but  one  body,  and  its 
members  ought  to  act  not  as  distinct  persons,  but  asjoint- 
♦  Li2hlfool,  p.  132. 
15 


170  HISTORY    OF    THE 

members  ;  that  the  office-bearers  were  instituted  by  Christ, 
for  the  general  good  and  edification,  and  also  ought  to  act 
in  unity  ;  that  members  are  baptized  not  into  one  particu- 
lar congregation,  but  into  the  general  body  ;  and  that  this 
general  body  is  cast  into  societies,  which  are  called  by  di- 
vines instituted  churches.  He  further  reasoned,  that  it  ap- 
pears from  Scripture,  that  when  so  many  were  converted 
in  any  city  as  to  make  a  congregation,  the  apostles  ap- 
pointed them  elders;  that  though  they  increased,  so  as  to 
form  many  congregations  in  that  city,  they  continued  to  be 
but  one  Church,  as  at  Jerusalem  ;  that  though  not  speci- 
fically declared,  yet  it  seemed  probable  that  the  several 
pastors  had  their  several  charges  ;  and  that  this  pattern 
ought  to  be  followed.  Mr.  Gillespie  pursued  a  similar  line 
of  argument ;  gave  an  illustration  from  the  representative 
government  of  the  States-General  in  the  Netherlands  ;  and 
added,  that  the  power  of  government  in  a  presbytery  is  not 
a  power  of  order,  but  of  jurisdiction,  and  that  they  govern 
not  as  presbyters,  but  as  a  presbytery.  Mr.  Seaman  met 
the  objections  of  Mr.  Goodwin,  by  proving  that  the  incon- 
veniences alleged  against  the  presbyterial  government  of 
churches  would,  were  they  just,  apply  equally  to  civil  gov- 
ernment of  the  rppres.entative  kind  ;  but  no  such  incon- 
veniences or  incongruities  were  experienced  ;  therefore 
the  objections  urged  hy  Mr.  Goodwin  could  not  be  v%'ell 
founded.  He  proved,  also,  that  a  minister  may  stand  in 
relation  to  more  congregations  than  one,  and  that  several 
offices  may,  without  incongruity,  meet  in  one  person:  that 
a  minister  may  do  his  duty  in  one  congregation  and  also 
in  the  presbytery,  as  a  representative  may  to  his  own  con- 
stituents and  also  to  the  general  administration  ;  and  that 
the  people  may  enjoy  their  full  rights  under  a  Presbyterial 
government,  in  the  choice  of  their  pastor,  as  in  civil  mat- 
ters they  have  their  full  rights  in  the  choice  of  their  par- 
liamentary representatives.*' 

Such  is  a  fair  outline  of  the  arguments  used  on  both 
Hides  at  the  commencement  of  the  main  stem  of  the  Inde- 
pendent controversy.  When  Mr.  Goodwin  replied,  he 
admitted  the  truth  and  applicability  of  the  logical  maxim, 
"  What  belongs  to  the  whole,  as  such,  does  not  equally 
belong  to  each  part ;"  for  the  whole  is  a  Presbytery,  but 
*  Liiihlfool,  pp.  132-131. 


WKSTMLNSTER    ASSEMBLY.  -7i 

every  member  of  it  is  not  a  presbytery.  Various  attempts 
were  made  by  him,  and  also  by  others  of  tlie  Independents, 
lO  escape  from  the  force  of  the  argument,  and  to  support 
their  own  proposition,  but  without  success.  A  sliglit 
:hange  was  ffiven  to  the  course  of  debate  by  the  reference 
which  Mr.  Burroughs  made  to  1  Cor.  v.  4-,  in  which  church 
censure  is  spoken  of  as  inflicted  in  the  presence  of  tl'-e 
church  ;  and  this,  lie  endeavored  to  prove,  could  not  have 
taken  place  had  it  been  the  deed  of  a  presbytery.  A 
lengthened  discussion  arose  on  this  point,  in  which  mucii 
minuteness  of  criticism  and  subtlety  of  argument  were 
displayed  on  both  sides,  till  the  topic  was  abandoned,  as 
not  conclusive.  During  this  debate,  Mr.  Nye  admitted 
that  there  was  a  very  close  approximation  between  the 
two  systems,  saying,  that  the  Independents  "  held  classical 
and  synodical  meetings  very  useful  and  profitable,  yea, 
possibly  agreeable  to  the  institution  of  Christ  j  but  the 
question  is  this,  whether  these  meetings  have  the  same 
power  that  ecclesia  primn^  or  one  single  congregation, 
has  V*  If  he  and  his  friends  could  have  admitted  one 
additional  elementary  principle,  there  mioht  speedily  have 
taken  place  a  complete  agreement,  namely,  that  the  power 
of  presbyteries,  synods,  and  assemblies,  is  cumulative,  not 
privative  ;  that  is,  that  it  consists  in  the  collected  power 
of  all  the  congregations  of  which  it  is  composed,  and  in 
reality  adds  to  the  power  of  each,  rather  than  takes  away 
its  proper  power  from  any. 

Becoming  weary  of  this  protracted  discussion,  several 
of  the  divines  proposed  that  they  should  leave  off  these 
metaphysical  disquisitions,  and  proceed  to  the  considera- 
tion of  those  passages  of  Scripture  which  might  be  brought 
forward  as  direct  proofs  ;  but  by  the  vote  of  the  Assembly 
the  Independents  were  allowed  to  continue  brinsfing  for- 
ward all  thpir  objections. f  This  we  mention  in  order  to 
show  that  the  Assembly  treated  the  Dissenting  Brethren 
with  extreme  indulgence  and  toleration,  and  never  attempt- 
ed to  run  them  down  by  the  force  of  numbers  and  the 
authority  of  a  vote,  as  they  could  have  so  easily  done, 
and  no  doubt  would  have  done,  had  they  been  the  into- 
lerant and  overbearing  bigots  which  they  have  been  so 
srenerallj'"  and  so  unjustly  called. 
•  Li-htfoct,  p.  1  ! }. 


172  I!  1 -TORY  OF  TliF. 

On  the  14th  of  Fcbrup.ry  the  first  committee  rep'  rted,  in 
confirmation  of  the  proposition  that  many  congvegaiions 
maybe  under  one  presbytery,  the  following  instances  from 
Scripture  : — 1.  The  Church  of  Jerusalem  5  2.  The  Church 
of  Corinth;  3.  Of  Ephesus  ;  4.  Of  Antioch.  Assuming 
that  the  existence  of  many  congregations  and  but  one 
presbytery  at  Jerusalem  had  been  proved  in  a  former 
debate,  the  other  instances  were  proved  by  the  following 
arcruments  :  Corinth — from  the  time  of  Paul's  abode  there  \ 
from  the  different  places  of  meeting,  as  Cenchrea,  the  house 
of  Justus,  and  of  Chloe,  and  the  use  of  the  word  churches, 
in  the  plural ;  and  from  the  multitude  of  pastors, —  1  Cor. 
i.  12,  iv.  15;  and  that  these  congregations  were  under  one 
presbytery, — 1  Cor.  v,2  Cor.  ii.  Ephesus— from  Paul's 
continuance  there  ;  the  special  effect,  and  the  reason  of  his 
stay  given  ;  from  the  multitude  of  pastors,  termed  elders 
ancl  overseers,  or  bishops  ;  and  under  one  presbytery,  which 
exercised  jurisdiction,— Rev.  ii.  1,  2.  Antioch — from  a 
multitude  of  believers, — Acts  xi.  21-26  ;  and  from  numbers 
of  pastors  and  teachers, — Acts  xiii-  1,  xv.  35.  The  report 
concluded  with  this  argument  : — "  Where  there  were 
more  believers  than  could  meet  in  one  place,  and  more 
pastors  than  could  be  for  one  congregation,  then  there 
Vv-ere  more  congregations  than  one  ;  but  it  was  so  in  these 
Churches:  and  it  was  lawful  for  these  to  be  under  onepres- 
byterial  government;  therefore  it  is  so  now."*  These  pro- 
positions were,  as  usual,  laid  aside  till  the  objections  al- 
ready stated  by  the  Independents  should  have  been  fully 
debated. 

The  discussion  respecting  Church  censure  and  excom- 
munication was  again  resumed,  wnth  reference  to  1  Cor. 
V.  ;  and  Mr.  Goodwin  argued  that  "  discipline  did  not  con- 
stitute a  church,  nor  is  any  note  of  a  church."  Selden 
doubted  whether  the  passage  referred  to  had  anything  to 
do  with  excommunication.  This  was  answered  very 
strongly  by  Mr.  Vines  and  others;  and  the  Independents 
were  requested  to  state  clearly  their  opinion  on  the  sub- 
ject. To  this  Goodwin  answered,  "  That  the  people  can- 
not excommunicate  ;  and  that  the  people,  if  need  be,  yet 
must  have  their  vote."  The  inference  was  immediately 
drawn,  that  if  the  elders  were  outvoted  the  excommunica- 
•  Lisfhlfool,  p.  151. 


WF.STMrx.STF.:^     ASSKMI'.LY.  173 

tion  would  be  prevented,  and  thus  tlie  theory  of  llie  Inde- 
pendents, of  simple  admonition  or  non-communion,  would 
alone  be  practicable.  At  last  the  Assembly  decided,  that 
the  argument  of  the  Independents  was  not  proved,  and  did 
not  conclude  against  the  proposition. 

The  attention  of  the  Assembly  was  next  directed  to 
Matt,  xviii.  15-17,  by  Mr.  Bridge,  who  endeavored,  in  a 
very  elaborate  argument,  to  prove  that  the  church  there 
montio-ned  was  not  a  civil  court,  not  a  Jewish  sanhedrim, 
not  a  presbytery  or  synod,  not  a  national  Church,  but  a 
particular  congregation  only,  and  yet  that  it  had  the  power 
of  the  highest  censure,  without  appeal;  therefore  every 
particular  congregation,  consisting  of  elders  and  brethren, 
should  have  entire  and  full  power  and  jurisdiction  within 
itself.  Mr.  Marshall  met  the  argument,  point  by  point,  in 
an  answer,  equally  full  and  elaborate  ;  assuming,  as  the 
basis  of  his  reply,  that  the  term  Church  neither  meant 
universal,  national,  nor  provincial  only,  nor  a  single  con- 
gregation only  ;  but  either,  or  all  in  turn,  as  the  occasion 
might  require.  Mr.  Vines,  Mr.  Gataker,  Mr.  Goodwin,  Mr. 
Calamj^,  and  others,  took  part  in  the  debate,  which  was 
conducted  v/ith  great  skill  and  ability. 

When  the  subject  was  resumed,  another  direction  was 
given  to  the  discussion  by  Selden,  who  produced  a  long  and 
learned  arofument  to  prove  that  the  passage  of  Scripture  in 
question  contained  no  authority  for  ecclesiastical  jurisdic- 
tion. His  object  was,  to  guard  against  any  conclusion  of 
the  Assembly  which  might  contradict  the  JSrastian  theory, 
and  therefore  he  labored  to  represent  the  whole  as  relating 
to  the  ordinary  practice  of  the  Jews  in  their  common 
courts ;  by  whom,  as  he  asserted,  one  sentence  was  excom- 
munication, pronounced  by  the  civil  court.  Herle  and 
Marshall  both  attempted  answers,  but,  says  Lightfoot,  "  so 
as  I  confess  gave  me  no  satisfaction."  Gillespie  then  came 
to  the  rescue,  and,  in  a  speech  of  astonishing  power  and 
acuteness,  completely  confuted  Selden,  even  on  his  own 
chosen  ground,  and  where  his  strength  was  greatest.  He 
proved  that  the  passage  could  not  mean  a  civil  court,  be- 
cause,—  1.  The  nature  of  the  oftence  and  cause  treated  of 
is  spiritual  ;  2.  The  end  is  spiritual,  for  it  is  not  restitution 
or  satisfaction,  but  to  gain  the  soul ;  .3.  The  persons  are 
Bpiritual,  for  Christ  speaks  to  his  apostles;  4.  The  manner 
15* 


l'74f  nrsTORV  of  the 

of  proceeding  is  spiritual — all  is  done  in  the  name  of 
Christ;  5.  The  censure  is  spiritual,  for  it  is  binding  the 
soul;  6.  Christ  Avould  not  have  sent  his  disciples  for  pri- 
vate spiritual  injuries  to  civil  courts  ;  7.  The  Church  of  the 
Jews  had  spiritual  censures,  and  the  expression,  "  Let  him 
be  as  a  heathen,"  imported  prohibition  from  sacred  things, 
for  the  heathen  might  not  come  into  the  temple;  and  the 
ceremonial  unclean  might  not  enter,  much  more  the  morally 
unclean.*  This  appears  to  have  been  the  speech  referred 
to  by  Wodrow,  and  of  which  there  still  exist  many  tradi- 
tionary anecdotes,  illustrative  of  the  very  extraordinary 
effect  produced  upon  all  that  heard  it-  Selden  himself  is 
reported  to  have  said,  at  its  conclusion,  "  That  young  man, 
by  this  single  speech,  has  swept  away  the  labors  of  ten 
years  of  my  life  ;"f  and  it  is  remarkable  that  Selden  made 
no  attempt  to  reply  to  Gillespie,  though  he  answered  some 
of  the  arguments  used  bj^  others  who  spoke  after  him. 

About  the  same  time  Mr.  Nye  craftily  endeavored  to  ex- 
cite the  jealousy  of  the  Parliament  against  Presbyterial 
Church  government,  but  overreached  himself.  He  had 
attempted  to  frame  an  argument  against  the  power  of  pres- 
byteries, on  the  assumption  "  that  there  is  no  power  over 
another  power,  where  there  is  no  distinction  in  nature  nor 
difference  in  operation;"  but  he  was  called  to  order, as  not 
speaking  to  the  question.  On  the  following  day,  finding 
the  Assembly  full  of  the  nobility  and  members  of  Parlia- 
ment, he  resumed  the  argument,  persisting  in  his  speech 
against  the  evident  feeling  of  the  House  ;  and  after  he  had 
attempted  to  show  that  the  admission  of  a  power  over  a 
power,  in  Church  courts,  would  lead  to  an  ecclesiastical 
government  commensurate  with  that  of  the  civil,  he  drew 
the  inference,  that  it  would  be  pernicious  for  a  great  com- 
monwealth were  so  great  a  body  to  be  permitted  to  grow 
up  within  it;  in  short,  he  attempted  to  alarm  the  Parlia- 
ment by  the  dread  of  that  phantom  of  which  so  much  has 
been  heard,  an  imperium  in  imperio,  or  one  government 
within  another,  as  a  formidable  and  monstrous  anomaly, 
dangerous  to  the  peace  of  states  and  kingdoms.  This 
insidious  attempt  caused  a  great  sensation;  some  proposed 
that  he  should  be  at  once  expelled,  others  declared  that  his 

♦  Lightfoot,  pp.  165-168. 

t  Wodrow's  Analccta;   M'Crie's  Sketches,  p.  300, — Appendix, 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBLY.  175 

language  was  seditious,  and  it  was  voted  that  he  had  spo- 
ken against  order — which  was  the  higliest  censure  that 
the  Assembly  inflicted.  Mr.  Marshall  appealed  to  all  the 
parliamentary  members  present,  whether  the  Presbyterial 
government  be  more  terrible  to  them  than  ten  thousand  or 
twenty  thousand  congregations,  none  in  reference  or  de- 
pendence to  another.  Warriston  showed  that  the  ecclesi- 
astical and  civil  governments  strengthened  each  other  j  and 
that  one  power  over  another  in  the  Church  no  more  tended 
to  produce  confusion  or  injury  than  in  civil  matters,  where 
one  court  is  subordinate  to  another,  and  yet  but  one  state. 
And  Mr.  Whitelocke,  M.P.,  followed  a  similar  course  of 
illustration,  and  ended  his  remark  by  saying.  "  What  a  con- 
fusion it  will  prove  to  have  congregations  independent  1" 
This  debate,  ending  so  very  much  the  reverse  of  what  Nye 
had  expected,  caused  the  Independents  to  abate  their  oppo- 
sition considerably;  and  it  was  voted  that  their  arguments 
had  not  concluded  against  the  proposition  bex"ore  the 
Assembly.* 

The  next  subject  was  respecting  the  instance  of  the 
Church  at  Jerusalem,  as  proving  that  one  presbytery  was 
over  many  congregations.  AUhough  considerable  time 
was  spent  in  discussing  this  topic,  it  did  not  draw  forth 
any  great  exhibition  of  learning  or  power,  such  as  had 
been  previously  displayed.  Almost  the  only  idea  of  im- 
portance brought  out  in  this  discussion  was  that  suggested 
by  Gillespie,  namely,  that  there  could  be  no  other  princi- 
ple whereby  several  congregations  could  be  one  church, 
but  only  government.  Their  dwelling  in  one  town  made 
them  a  civil  body,  but  not  an  ecclesiastical  ;  their  ecclesi- 
astical union  could  not  be  but  in  a  presbytery,  for  they 
could  not  meet  together  in  one  place ;  therefore  it  was 
only  as  forming  a  presbytery,  and  in  respect  to  govern- 
ment, which  is  the  function  of  a  presbytery,  that  they  could 
be  one  ecclesiastical  body.  Once  more  the  Independents 
were  staggered,  and  could  not  answer.  Both  Goodwin 
and  Nye  admitted  that  at  least  the  keys  of  doctrine  are  in 
the  hands  of  a  synod  or  assembly ;  and  that  as  many  men 
united  have  more  moral  power  than  one  man,  so  many 
churches  joining  together  must  have  more  ecclesiastical 
power  than  one  church  ;  and  in  order  to  avail  themselves 
*  Lijhtfoot,  pp.  IC,8-110;  Baillie,  vol.  ii.  pp.  \46,  147. 


176  HISTORY    OF    THE 

of  this  renewed  approximation,  the  Assembly,  on  the  mo« 
lion  of  Mr.  Henderson,  proposed  a  committee  for  the  pur- 
pose of  attempting  to  obtain  an  accommodation  with  the 
Independents;  and  Messrs.  Seaman,  Vines,  Palmer,  Mar- 
shall, Goodwin,  Nye,  Burroughs,  and  Bridge,  together 
with  the  four  Scottish  divines,  were  named  for  the  com- 
mittee. On  the  14<th  of  March  this  committee  reported 
that  the  Independents  had  agreed  to  the  following  propo- 
sitions:— "  1.  That  there  be'a  presbytery,  or  meeting  of 
the  elders  of  many  neighboring  congregations,  to  consult 
upon  such  things  as  concern  those  congregations  in  mat- 
ters ecclesiastical;  and  such  presbyteries  are  the  ordinan- 
ces of  Christ,  having  his  power  and  authority.  2.  Such 
presbyteries  have  power,  in  cases  that  are  to  come  before 
them,  to  declare  and  determine  doctrinally  what  is  agree- 
able to  God's  Word  ;  and  this  judgment  of  theirs  is  to  be 
received  with  reverence  and  obligation,  as  Christ's  ordin- 
ance. 3.  They  have  power  to  require  the  elders  of  those 
conoregations  to  give  an  account  of  anything  scandalous 
in  doctrine  or  practice."*  The  Assembly  agreed  to  the 
continuance  of  the  committee,  and  granted  them  liberty 
to  take  into  consideration  anything  that  might  tend  to  ac- 
commodation, and  to  report  when  convenient.  Thus, 
again,  it  appears  that  the  Assembly  v.^as  the  very  reverse 
of  intolerant  and  overbearing. 

Another  rep  .rt  was  brought  forward  from  this  committee 
about  a  week  afterwards,  containing  two  additional  propo- 
sitions, forming  five  in  all,  as  follows  : — "  4.  The  churches 
and  elderships  being  offended,  let  them  examine,  admonish, 
and,  in  case  of  obstinacy,  declare  them  either  disturbers 
of  the  peace,  or  subverters  of  the  faith,  or  otherwise,  as 
the  nature  and  degree  of  the  offence  shall  require.  5.  In 
case  that  the  particular  church  or  eldership  shall  refuse  to 
reform  that  scandalous  doctrine  or  practice,  then  that 
meeting  of  elders,  which  is  assembled  from  several  churches 
and  congregations,  shall  acquaint  their  several  congrega- 
tions respectively,  and  withdraw  from  them,  and  deny 
Church  communion  and  fellowship  with  them."t  The  ac- 
count given  by  Baillie,  though  less  minute,  and  not  using 
the  very  language  of  the  committee,  expresses  his  view  of 
the  result  even  more  strongly  :  "  We  have  agreed  on  five 
•  Lightfoot,  pp.  214,  215.  \  Lighlfbot,  p.  229. 


WESTMINSTER   ASSEMBLE.  i'  ? 

or  six  propositions,  hoping,  by  God's  grace,  to  agree  in 
more.  They  yield,  that  a  presbytery,  even  as  we  take  it 
is  an  ordinance  of  God,  which  hath  power  and  authority 
from  Christ  to  call  the  ministers  and  elders,  or  any  in  their 
bounds,  before  them,  to  account  for  any  oflence  in  life  or 
doctiine,  to  try  and  examine  the  cause, — to  admonish  and 
rebuke  ;  and  if  they  be  obstinate,  to  declare  them  as  hea- 
thens and  publicans,  and  give  them  over  to  the  punishment 
of  the  magistrates  ;  also  doctrinally,  to  declare  the  mind 
of  God  in  all  questions  of  religion,  with  such  authority  as 
oblii^es  to  receive  their  just  sentences  5  and  that  they  will 
be  members  of  such  fixed  presbyteries,  keep  the  meetings, 
preach  as  it  comes  to  their  turn,  and  join  in  the  discipline 
after  doctrine."*  Surely  but  very  little  more  was  neces- 
sary to  have  produced  a  complete  agreement  between  the 
Presbyterians  and  the  Independents,  since  the  latter  party 
had  thus  assented  to  all  that  was  essential  to  Presbyterian 
Church  government  ;  but  unhappily  they  seemed  to  dread, 
that  by  uniting  with  the  Presbyterians,  they  should  lose 
their  influence  among  the  Sectaries,  and  in  the  army  ;  and 
Nye  in  particular  was  too  deeply  engaged  in  the  political 
intrio^ues  of  Vane  and  Cromwell  to  be  willing  to  relinquish 
that  Influence  v^'hich  rendered  him  a  person  of  importance. 
On  the  13th  of  Alarch  the  discussion  terminated  in  the 
aiBrmation  of  the  propositions  respecting  Church  govern- 
ment, so  far  as  regarded  tlie  general  statement  ;  and  the 
proofs  from  the  instances  of  Jerusalem  and  Corinth,  after 
havinor  occupied  the  attention  of  the  Assembly  for  thirty 
days  passed  in  earnest  and  strenuous  debate,  during  which 
all  the  aro-nments  which  profound  learning  and  acute  inge- 
nuity could  devise  were  brought  forward  and  discussed 
with  equal  minuteness  and  ability.  The  subject  was  then 
referred  to  the  committee,  that  all  the  points  which  had 
been  decided  might  be  systematically  arranged,  partly  to 
be  ready  to  be  reported  to  the  Parliament,  and  partly  for 
the  satisfaction  of  the  Assembly  itself,  and  for  the  sake  of 
order.  This  report  was  produced  on  the  10th  of  April,  the 
Assembly  having  been  occupied  in  the  interim  with  the 
subject  of  ordination,  as  already  related.  The  propositions 
reported  were  the  three  following: — "  1.  The  Scripture 
doth  hold  out  a  presbytery  in  a  Church ;  2.  A  presbytery 
•  Baillie,  vol.  ii.  p.  148. 


J  78  HISTORY    OF    THE 

consisteth  of  ministers'^of  the  Word,  and  such  other  public 
officers  as  are  agreeable  to,  and  warranted  by  the  Word 
of  God  to  be  Church  governors,  to  join  with  the  ministers 
in  the  government  of  the  Church  ,  3.  The  Scripture  holds 
forth  that  many  conoregalions  may  be  under  one  presby- 
terial  government.  Proved  by  the  instance  of  the  Church 
at  Jerusalem."  The  instance  of  the  Church  at  Corinth 
was  not  given,  as  it  had  been  adduced  chiefly  for  the  pur- 
pose of  proving  the  power  of  Church  censures.  Though 
the  Independents  had  assented  to  the  essence  of  these  pro- 
positions in  the  Committee  for  Accommodation,  yet  they 
vehementl}^  opposed  the  sending  of  them  to  the  Parliament 
for  ratification  ;  and  the  Assembly,  on  the  motion  of  Mr. 
Marshall,  again  consented  to  lay  them  aside  for  a  time.* 

The  Assembly  resumed  the  subject  on  the  16th  of  April, 
to  prove  Presbyierial  government  from  the  instance  of  the 
Church  of  Ephesus  ;  and  after  some  debate,  this  instance 
was  sustained  as  a  proof  of  the  main  proposition.  Another 
topic  followed,  which  cost  some  discussion,  namely,  that 
so  many  visible  saints  as  dwelt  in  one  city  were  but  one 
Church  in  regard  of  Church  government.  On  this  point, 
Rutherford  was  anxious  to  guard  against  any  infringement 
of  the  due  power  in  censure  and  government  in  particular 
congregations  ,*  and  in  this  he  was  supported  by  Hender- 
son. This  guard  was  necessary,  in  consequence  of  ex- 
treme views  held  by  some  English  Presbyterian  divines, 
who,  in  order,  apparently,  to  keep  as  far  as  possible  remote 
from  the  Pndependent  system,  opposed  any  power  of  cen- 
sure or  government  in  congregations,  and  denied  the  right 
or  propriety  of  congregational  elderships. f  This  is  men- 
tioned chiefly  for  the  purpose  of  corroborating  an  idea 
which  has  been  repeatedly  suggested, — that  instead  of  the 
Scottish  commissioners  being  the  direct  instigators  of  the 
Westminster  Assembly  to  aim  at  a  rigid  and  unaccommo- 
dating form  of  Church  government  essentially  intolerant 
and  tyrannical,  the  very  reverse  is  the  truth  ;  for  while 
they  refused  all  compromise  of  fundamental  principles,  they 
were  exceedingly  desirous  to  remove  everything  in  minor 
matters  to  which  their  brethren  could  not  readily  assent, 
or  from  which  they  dreaded  an  interference  with  their  own 
conscientious  scruples. 

*  Li^htfoot,  p.  2^.0. 

"  Lightfoot,,  pp.  25.^),  256;   Baillip,  vol.  ii.  p.  177. 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEMRL'?.  179 

Some  difficulty  was  encountered  in  stating  how  Chris- 
tians should  be  most  conveniently  and  re^jularly  formed 
into  distinct  confrreg^ations,  so  as  best  to  obtain  the  benefit 
of  pastoral  instruction  and  s^iperintendence.  This  the 
Assembly  thought  should  be  by  the  bounds  of  their  dwell 
ings,  that  is,  by  the  parochial  system  ;  but  the  Indepen- 
dents opposed  it,  because  it  was  contrary  to  their  mode  of 
"gathering  churches,"  as  it  wns  termed.  The  proposition 
was  however  affirmed. 

The  subject  of  ruling  elders  was  again  resumed  on  the 
3d  of  May,  after  having  been  laid  aside  for  a  considerable 
time.  At  first  it  was  proposed  that  there  should  be  at  least 
one  ruling  elder  in  every  congregation  ;  but  this  was  stre- 
nuously opposed  by  the  Scottish  commissioners,  as  in 
reality  not  forming  a  congregational  eldership.  It  was  at 
length  decided,  that  in  every  congregation  there  should  be, 
besides  the  minister,  others  to  assist  him  in  ruling,  and 
some  to  take  care  for  the  poor  ;  the  number  of  each  to  be 
proportioned  to  the  congregation. 

Another  topic  then  called  forth  a  strenuous  debate  of 
five  days'  duration,  namely,  "  That  no  single  congregation, 
which  may  conveniently  join  together  in  an  association, 
may  assume  unto  itself  all  and  sole  power  of  ordination." 
Against  this  proposiiion  the  Independents  mustered  all 
their  adherents,  and  put  forth  their  whole  strscngth,  because 
it  condemned  the  central  principle  of  their  system.  When 
it  came  to  the  vote,  "  it  was  affirmed  by  twenty-seven,  and 
denied  by  nineieen  ;  and  this  business,"  adds  Lightfoot, 
"•  had  been  managed  with  the  most  heat  and  confusion  of 
anything  that  had  happened  among  us."*'  When  the  reasons 
to  prove  the  general  proposition  were  brought  forward, 
another  keen  struggle  took  place,  the  first  reason  being 
carried  by  a  majority  of  four  voles,  the  second  by  a  ma- 
jority of  five.f 

The  committee  appointed  to  frame  a  summary  of  Church 
government,  produced,  instead  of  a  rej  ort,  a  proposition 
tf»  be  debated,  to  the  following  effect: — "Concerning  the 
ruling  officers  of  particular  congregations,  they  have 
power,  1  Authoritatively  to  call  before  them  scandalous 
or  suspected  persons;  2.  To  admonish  or  rebuke  authori- 
tatively ;  3.  To  keep  from  the  sacrament  authoritatively  ' 
*  Lightfoot,  p.  262.  Ibid.,  p.  267. 


180  HISTORY  OF  THE 

4.  To  excommunicate."  The  first  topic  was  easily  admit- 
ted, with  a  slight  change  on  its  terms  ;  as  was  also  the 
second  ;  but  the  third  led  to  a  protracted  and  very  learned 
debate,  having  been  recast  into  this  form  :  "  Authoritative 
suspension  from  the  Lord's  table  of  a  person  not  yet  cast 
out  of  the  church,  is  agreeable  to  the  Scripture."*  This 
proposition  was  opposed  by  Coleman,  Herle,  Case,  and 
particularly  by  Lightfoot,  who  attempted  to  prove  his 
view  by  the  instance  of  Judas;  and  this  led  to  a  discus- 
sion on  that  point,  in  which  scarcely  any  agreed  with 
Lightfoot's  opinion.  The  chief  advocates  of  suspending 
scandalous  persons  were  Young,  Calamy,  Gillespie,  Ruth- 
erford, Eeynolds,  Burgess,  and  Dr.  Hoyle.  The  Indepen- 
dents did  not  enter  warmly  into  the  discussion  ;  and 
Goodwin,  after  endeavoring  to  represent  it  as  differing 
little  from  admonition,  concluded  by  saying,  that  his  judg- 
ment fell  in  with  the  proposition,  only  he  liked  not  the  au- 
thoritative doing  of  it.  It  was  at  length  decided  in  the 
affirmative,  none  voting  against  it  but  Lightfoot.  But 
though  the  proposition  had  thus  obtained  the  sanction  of 
the  Assembly,  it  was  afterwards  opposed  by  the  Parlia- 
ment, as,  indeed,  might  have  been  expected,  from  the  lax 
notions  entertained  generally  by  men  of  the  world  on  all 
such  subjects. 

The  subject  of  excommunication  was  not  again  resumed 
till  the  16th  of  October,  when  two  passages  of  Scripture 
were  brought  forward  to  prove  it,  namely,  1  Cor.  v.,  and 
Matt,  xviii.  17,  18.  Both  were  admitted,  and  the  proposi- 
tion was  further  supported  by  this  argument :  "  They  that 
have  authority  to  judge  of  and  admit  to  the  sacrament 
such  as  are  to  receive  it,  have  authority  to  keep  back  such 
as  shall  be  found  unworthy."  Against  this  Lightfoot 
alone  voted  in  the  negative  ;  and  that  chiefly  because  he 
was  not  convinced  that  there  is  suspension  or  excommu- 
nication, as  a  power  belonging  to  the  Church, — an  opinion 
which  sprung  from  his  Erastianism.  Thus  terminated  the 
debates  on  that  much  contested  point,  on  the  25th  of  Oc- 
tober, so  far  as  the  Assembly  w^as  concerned:  the  opi- 
nions of  the  Parliament  will  fall  under  our  observation 
when  we  come  to  the  Erastian  controversy. 

Affairs  had  now  attained  so   much  maturity  that  a  criMi 
*  Lightfoot,  p.  268. 


WESTML\STER    ASSEMBI.V.  ISl 

had  become  inevitable  ;  for  every  point  having  been  very 
fully  debated  between  the  Presbyterians  and  the  Indepen- 
dents, they  must  either  unite,  or  adopt  some  new  course 
which  should  render  union  impossihie.  The  Prcsbyteri 
ans  had  done  everything  in  their  pov  er  to  meet  the  scru- 
ples of  the  Dissenting  Brethren,  both  by  allowing  them 
to  bring  forward  every  objection  which  they  could  devise, 
and  to  debate  till  all  were  thoroughly  exhausted,  and  also 
by  appointing  a  committee  of  their  own  number  to  confer 
with  them,  in  the  hope  of  avoiding  a  final  disruption.  But 
when  the  Dissenting  Brethren  could  not  persuade  the  As- 
sembly to  adopt  their  views  in  preference  to  its  own,  they 
renewed  their  intrigues  with  the  Independents  in  the 
army,  by  whose  influence  they  knew  they  would  be  sup- 
ported. The  state  of  political  affairs  was  favorable  to 
their  schemes.  Soon  after  the  battle  of  Marston,  in  which 
the  king's  army  sustained  such  a  severe  defeat,  proposals 
ivere  made  for  a  treaty  of  peace,  of  which  the  Presbyteri- 
ans in  the  Parliament  were  cordially  desirous,  if  it  could 
be  obtained  on  terms  sufficient  to  secure  the  liberties  of 
the  kingdom.  But  this  was  by  no  means  v/hat  the  Inde- 
pendents in  both  Parliament  and  army  desired,  conse- 
quently the  scene  of  contest  was  removed  frons  the  tented 
field  to  the  legislative  assemblies,  and  this  brought  Oliver 
Cromwell  to  the  House  of  Commons.  This  deep-minded 
and  far-foreseeing  man  perceived  clearly  that  were  a 
peace  concluded,  and  Church  government  established,  his 
ambitious  prospects  must  be  completely  destroyed  ;  and 
with  his  usual  sagacity,  anticipating  the  unyielding  obsti- 
nacy of  the  king,  which  would  render  any  satisfactory  pa- 
cific arrangement  impossible,  he  set  himself  chiefly  to 
prevent  the  settlement  of  the  Church  by  means  of  a  Pres- 
byterian establishment.  "This  day"  (13th  September), 
says  Baillie,  "  Cromwell  has  obtained  an  order  of  the 
House  of  Commons  to  refer  to  the  committee  of  both  king- 
doms the  accommodation  or  toleration  of  the  Indepen- 
dents, a  high  and  unexpected  order."  In  another  passage, 
referring  to  the  same  event,  Baillie  adds,  that  "  this  waa 
done  without  the  least  advertisement  to  any  of  us  or  Oi' 
the  Assembly."  "  This  has  much  afl^ected  us.  These 
men  have  retarded  the  Assembly  these  long  twelve 
months.  This  is  the  fruit  of  their  disservice,  to  obtain 
II) 


182  HISTORV  OF  THE 

really  an  act  of  Parliament  for  their  toleration,  before  we 
have  got  anything  for  Presbytery  either  in  Assembly  or 
Parliament."* 

The  order  from  the  House  of  Commons  was  produced 
in  the  Assembly  on  the  16th  of  September,  in  the  following 
terms  : — "  That  the  committee  of  Lords  and  Commons  ap- 
pointed to  treat  with  the  commissioners  of  Scotland,  and 
the  committee  of  the  Assembly,  do  take  into  consideration 
the  differences  of  the  opinions  of  the  members  of  the  As- 
sembly in  point  of  Church  government,  and  to  endeavor 
an  union  if  it  be  possible.  And  in  case  that  cannot  be  done, 
to  endeavor  the  finding  out  some  way  how  far  tender  con- 
sciences, who  cannot  in  all  things  submit  to  the  same  rule 
which  shall  be  established,  maybe  borne  with  according  to 
the  Word,  and  as  may  stand  with  the  public  peace  ;  that 
so  the  proceedings  of  the  Assembly  may  not  be  so  much 
retarded."!  In  compliance  with  this  order,  the  committee 
met  on  the  20th  of  September,  and  appointed  a  sub-com- 
mittee, consisting  of  Dr.  Temple,  Messrs.  Marshall,  Herle, 
Values,  Goodwin,  and  Nye,  to  consider  of  the  differences  of 
opinion  in  the  Assembly,  in  point  of  Church  government, 
and  to  report  to  the  Grand  Committee.  These  divines  ac- 
cordingly formed  what  was  called  the  sub-committee  of 
agreements;  and  prepared  several  propositions  concerning 
the  government  of  particular  congregations,  ordination, 
&c.,  which  they  laid  before  the  Grand  Committee,  on  the 
11th  of  October.  Having  some  additional  propositions  to 
frame  respecting  the  jurisdiction  of  Presbyteries  and  Sy- 
nods, they  were  adjourned,  and  appointed  to  meet  again  on 
the  15th  of  October,  and  then  to  produce  a  complete  report. 
When  they  met  on  the  day  appointed,  their  additional  pro- 
positions were  read  ;  but  when  it  was  proposed  to  take 
them  into  consideration,  it  was  objected  that  it  was  not 
consistent  with  strict  propriety  to  discuss  objections 
against  a  proposed  rule  of  Church  government  till  that  rule 
itself  should  have  been  completed  by  the  Assembly  and 
the  House  of  Parliament.  The  proceedings  of  this  Com- 
mittee of  Accommodation  were  therefore  suspended  by  the 
House  of  Commons  till  their  further  pleasure,  no  real  pro- 
gress towards  an  agreement  having  been  made. 

•  Baillie,  vol.  ii.  pp.  226,  230. 

t  Papers  for  Accommodation,  p.  1. 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBLY.  l83 

Without  relating  minutely  the  proceedings  of  tliis  com- 
mittee, it  may  be  enough  to  state,  that  in  what  was  termed 
the  preface  of  their  report,  tliey  expressed  their  confidence 
that  they  would  jointly  an^rec  in  one  Confession  of  Faith, 
and  in  one  Directory  of  Public  Worship,  their  only  differ- 
ence being  in  points  of  Church  government.  They  framed 
nine  propositions  respecting  the  power  of  individual  con- 
gregations, in  six  of  which  they  were  all  agreed,  with  a 
slight  and  miimportant  explanation.  The  points  of  the 
other  three  in  which  the  Independents  could  not  quite  agree 
with  the  Presbyterians,  respected  the  power  of  congrega- 
tions to  excommunicate  members,  or  ordain  elders  by  sole 
authority  of  the  people,  seeking  merely  the  advice  of  neigh- 
boring ministers,  but  not  subject  to  the  control  of  a  presby- 
tery ;  and  the  parochial  system,  which  the  Independents 
opposed,  as  contrary  to  their  theory  of  gathering  churclies 
out  of  other  churches.  To  this  system  of  the  Independents 
the  Presbyterians  would  not  consent,  as  giving  countenance 
to  schism,  and  perpetuating  strife  and  jealousy  among  both 
ministers  and  people.  With  regard  to  the  jurisdiction  of 
Presbyteries  and  Synods,  the  [ndependents  could  consent 
to  nothing  more  than  the  advice  of  neighboring  ministers, 
to  be  respected,  but  not  authoritative  further  than  admoiii- 
tion  ;  and  in  case  of  the  offending  congregation  not  sub- 
mitting, withdrawing  from  it,  and  denying  Church  commu- 
nion and  fellowship,  but  without  any  actual  power  witi.in 
the  rangfe  of  any  particular  congregation  over  any  offend- 
ing member,  though  the  congregation  itself  might  be  ad- 
monished for  not  putting  forth  its  own  power  to  reform  its 
own  members.  It  is  plain  that  the  essential  diffeience  be- 
tween the  two  parties  remained  undiminished  ;  the  Indepen- 
dents continued  to  maintain  the  sole  power  of  congregations 
to  exercise  Church  government,  and  to  demand  the  privi- 
lege of  gathering  churches,  or  congregations,  out  of  tlie 
congregations  of  the  Presbyterians,  with  whom,  neverthe- 
less, they  could  continue  to  hold  occasional  communion. 
These  points  the  Presbyterians  regarded  as  utterly  subver- 
sive of  their  whole  system;  and  though  they  would  have 
tolerated  in  practice,  they  could  not  consent  to  give  it  an 
avowed  and  legal  sanction,  regarding  it  as  nationally  impo- 
litic, in  a  religious  point  of  view  sinful,  and  with  regard  to 
the   Covenant,  a  violation   of   their  oath,  to  sanction  and 


184  .  HISTORY    OF    THE 

legalize  schism.  Besides,  they  perceived  clearly  that  this 
avowed  and  legal  sanction  to  the  Independent  system  would 
of  necessity  involve  an  equal  permission  to  the  wildest  and 
most  immoral  and  blasphemous  Sectarians  to  frame  sepa- 
rate congregations,  and  collect  alLerents,  by  every  artifice, 
and  to  the  ruin  of  both  Church  and  kingdom. 

Although  no  accommodation  resulted  from  the  delibera- 
tions of  this  committee,  there  is  every  reason  to  think  that 
Cromwell  and  Nye  obtained  the  end  they  had  in  view  when 
it  was  proposed.  The  progress  of  both  Parliament  and 
Assembly  towards  the  ratification  of  the  propositions 
respecting  Church  government,  was  suspended,  and  time 
was  obtained  for  adopting  another  course.  Accordingly, 
on  the  7th  of  November,  the  Independents  began  to  talk 
of  giving  in  to  the  Assembly  their  reasons  of  dissent  from 
the  Assembly's  propositions  respecting  Church  govern- 
ment. On  the  14th  of  November  these  reasons  were  pro- 
duced, and  on  the  following  day  were  read,  and  a  commit- 
tee of  twenty  appointed  to  take  them  into  consideration. 
The  most  prominent  persons  of  that  committee  were  Drs. 
Temple  and  Hoyle,  Messrs.  Marshall,  Tuckney,  Calamy, 
Palmer,  Vines,  Seaman,  and  Lightfoot,  and  their  answers 
to  the  reasons  of  dissent  were  read  in  the  Assembly  on  the 
17th  day  of  December,  and  continued  on  the  following 
days  till  they  had  been  fully  heard,  previous  to  their  being 
transmitted  to  Parliament. 

Thus  terminated  the  deliberations  of  the  Westminster 
Assembly,  so  far  as  regarded  the  proceedings  of  the  year 
IG-ii.  But  as  these  proceedings  had  chiefly  involved  the 
controversy  between  the  Presbyterians  and  the  Indepen- 
dents ;  and  as  the  points  in  which  they  difiered  had  been 
all  thoroughly  debated  in  the  Assembly  in  the  course  of 
the  year  1644,  and  the  contest  had  now  assumed  a  literary 
character,  in  consequence  of  the  production  of  written 
reasons  of  dissent,  and  written  answers  to  those  reasons, 
it  seems  expedient  to  complete  our  brief  outline  of  this 
important  controversy,  though  touching  a  little  upon  the 
events  of  subsequent  years,  before  directing  our  attention 
to  the  Erastian  controversy. 

The  Dissenting  Brethren  entered  their  dissent  with  rea- 
sons in  writing,  to  be  presented  to  the  Honorable  Houses 
by  the  AssemlDly,  to  the   three  following   propositions,  as 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBIA.  185 

the  only  points  in  which  there  existed  direct  and  essential 
differences  between  them  and  the  Presbyterians,  namely, 
— "  1.  To  the  third  proposition  concernin^^  prcshyterial  goV' 
ernmtnt  ;  2.  To  the  propositio?is  concerning  suhorJinution  of 
Jissemblies  ;  3.  To  the  proposition  concerning  the  poiver  of 
ordination,  whether  i?i  a  particular  congregation,  though  it 
maij  associate  with  others.^'' 

The  third  proposition  concerning  I'resbyterial  Chnrcli 
g-overntnent  was  as  follows: — "The  Scripture  doth  hold 
forth  that  many  congregations  may  be  under  one  presby- 
terial  government.  This  is  proved  by  instances,  1.  Of  the 
Church  of  Jerusalem,  which  consisted  of  more  congrega- 
tions than  one,  and  all  those  coufregfations  were  under  one 
presbyterial  government  ;  2.  Of  the  Church  of  Ephesus, 
in  which  there  were  more  congregations  than  one,  and 
where  there  w^ere  many  elders  over  these  congregations  as 
one  flock,  thongh  those  many  congregations  were  one 
Church,  and  under  one  presbyterial  government."  As  this 
proposition,  together  with  its  subordinate  details,  and  the 
Scripture  texts  on  which  the  whole  is  founded,  are  stated 
fully  in  the  Confession  of  Faith,  and  Directory,  it  cannot 
be  necessary  to  occupy  space  by  their  insertion. 

The  Dissenting  Brethren  gave  in  reasons  against  the 
proposition  itself,  and  also  against  the  instances  by  w^iich 
it  was  proved.  Their  argument  against  the  proposition  is 
in  the  following  terms: — "If  many  congregations  having 
all  elders  already  affixed  respectively  unto  them,  may  be 
under  a  presbyterial  government  ;  then  all  those  elders 
must  sustain  a  special  relation  of  elders  to  all  the  people 
of  those  congregations  as  one  Church,  and  to  every  one  as 
a  member  thereof.  But  for  a  company  of  such  elders 
already  affixed  to  sustain  such  a  relation,  carries  with  it  so 
great  and  manifold  incongruities  and  inconsistencies  with 
what  the  Scriptures  speak  of  elders  in  their  relation  to  a 
church  committed  to  them,  and  likewise  with  the  princi- 
ples of  the  Reformed  Churches  themselves,  as  cannot  be 
admitted.  And  therefore  such  a  government  may  not  be." 
The  proposition  thus  stated  is  explained,  defended,  and 
enforced,  in  a  treatise  of  forty  pages,  by  the  Dissenting 
Brethren,  whose  names  now  increased  to  seven,  are  sub- 
scribed to  it,  namely,  Thomas  Goodwnn,  Philip  Nye,  Jere- 
Tiiah  Burrouohs,  Sidrach  Simpson,  William  Bridtre,  \Vi.« 
16* 


186  IIISTOKV     OF    THE 

]iam  Greenhil],  William  Carter.  It  does  not  appear  necessary 
to  give  any  summary  of  the  arg-timents  brought  forward  by 
these  brethren  against  the  jVssembly,  or  in  illustration  of 
their  own  negative  proposition  ;  because,  from  the  propo- 
sition itself,  every  reader  will  see  that  their  major  propo- 
sition rests  on  a4i  assumption  which  itself  reqiiired  to  be 
botli  explained  and  proved  ;  and  that  their  nsinor  proposi- 
tion was  merely  a  congeries  of  supposed  incongruities  and 
inconsistencies,  which  they  asserted  would  follow,  but 
which  could  not  be  proved  to  be  necessary  consequences, 
and  had  not  followed  in  churches  already  under  Presbyte- 
rian government. 

The  answer  to  the  Assembly^  extended  to  eighty  pages, 
which,  in  one  point  of  viev/,  was  much  more  than  enough; 
but  aware  that  their  task  was  not  only  to  meet  the  argu- 
ment of  the  Dissenting  Brethren,  but  also  to  produce  a 
defence  of  Presbyterian  Church  government,  such  as  might 
be  laid  before  tlie  public,  they  entered  fully  into  the  sub- 
ject, both  meeting  objections,  and  restating  their  own 
direct  arguments.  In  this  manner  they  produced  an  ex- 
ceeding able  treatise,  exhibiting  clearly  and  amply  the 
grounds  of  Scripture  and  reason  on  which  the  Presbyte- 
rian Church  government,  in  their  opinion,  rested ;  and  cer- 
tainly the  Dissenting  Brethren  themselves  must  have  felt 
that  they  were  more  than  answered,  even  allowing  for  their 
natural  predilection  for  their  own  system.  It  is  impossible 
to  condense  this  able  defence  of  Presbyterian  Church  gov- 
ernment, so  as  to  present  it  within  the  lisnii  s  of  the  present 
work.  This  only  can  we  state,  that  the  Assembly's  answer 
begins  by  proving  the  fallacy  and  the  pernicious  conse- 
quences of  that  assumption  on  which  the  main  arguinents  of 
their  opponents  were  based.  They  then  showed  that  the 
argument  of  the  Independents  was  really  directed  against 
a  proposition  which  the  Assembly  never  held,  and  there- 
fore that  it  wao  beside  the  question  altogether.  And  then, 
returning  to  the  oubject  as  stated  by  the  Dissenting  Breth- 
ren, and  for  the  sake  of  argument,  allowing  it  to  be  regard- 
ed as  fairly  put,  they  proceeded  to  meet  and  refute  it  point 
by  point,  in  a  very  masterly  manner,  uniting  extensive 
learning,  acuteness  of  distinction,  logical  precision  of 
thought,  clear  and  energetic  language,  and  a  profound 
ivj.owledge  of  Scripture,  and  veneration  of  itp  sacred  truths, 


WKSTMINSTER     ASSEMBLY.  187 

as  the  sole  rule  of  guide  in  all  matters  of  a  religious  na 
ture. 

The  second  subject  against  which  the  Indepeiulents 
entered  their  dissent  with  reason  was,  The  propositions 
concerning  the  subordination  of  Assemblies.  These  pro- 
positions were  three  in  number,  bul,  as  their  dissent  was 
directed  chiefly  against  the  third,  the  statement  of  it  may- 
be enough  :  "  It  is  lawful  and  agreeable  to  the  Word  of 
God,  that  there  be  a  subordination  of  congregational, 
classical,  provincial,  and  national  assemblies,  that  so  ap- 
peals be  made  from  thr  inferior  to  the  superior  respectively. 
Proved  from  ]Maithew  xviii.,  which,  holding  forth  the  subor- 
dination of  an  oflending  brother  to  a  particular  church,  it 
doth  also,  by  a  parity  of  reason,  hold  forth  the  subordina- 
tion of  a  congregation  to  superior  assemblies."  The  Dis- 
senting Brethren  introduce  their  argument  in  the  following 
manner  : — "  Although  we  judge  synods  to  be  of  great  use, 
for  the  finding  out  and  declaring  of  truth  in  difficult  cases, 
and  encouragement  to  w^alk  in  the  truth  ,  for  the  healing 
offences,  and  to  give  advice  unto  the  magistrate  in  matters 
of  religion  ;  and  although  we  give  great  honor  and  consci- 
entious respect  unto  their  determination,  yet  seeing  tlje 
proposition  holds  forth  not  only  an  occasional,  but  asta?i(Ii/ig 
use  of  them  ;  and  that  in  subordination  of  one  unto  another, 
as  juridical,  ecclesiastical  courts  ;  and  this  in  all  cases  ;  we 
humbly  present  these  reasons  against  it  :  ].  All  such  subor- 
dinations of  courts,  having  greater  and  lesser  degrees  of 
power,  to  which,  in  their  order,  causes  are  to  be  brought, 
must  have  the  greatest  and  most  express  warrant  and 
designment  for  them  in  the  Word.  Whence  it  is  argued 
thus:^-Those  courts  that  must  have  the  most  express  war- 
rant and  designment  for  them  in  the  Word,  and  have  not, 
their  power  is  to  be  suspected,  and  not  erected  in  the 
Church  of  God.  But  these  ought  to  have  so.  and  have 
not  5  therefore  their  power  is  to  be  suspected,  and  not 
erected  in  the  Church  of  God.  2.  If  there  be  such  a  sub- 
ordination of  synods  in  the  Church  of  Christ,  then  there  is 
no  independency  but  in  an  cecumenica-l  council.  3.  That 
Church  power  which  cannot  show^  a  constant  divine  rule 
for  its  variation,  and  subordination,  and  ultimate  indepen- 
dency, is  not  of  God,  and  so  may  not  be  :  but  this  variation 
of  Church  power   into  these  subordinations,  cannot  show 


188  HISTORY    OF    THE 

any  such  steady  and  constant  rule  for  these  things ;  there* 
fore  it  may  not  be.  4.  The  government  which  necessarily 
produceth  representations  of  spiritual  power  out  of  other 
representations,  with  a  derived  power  therefrom,  there  is 
no  warrant  for:  but  these  subordinations  of  synods,  pro 
vincial,  national,  (Ecumenical,  for  the  government  of  the 
Church  do  so  ;  therefore  for  them  there  is  no  warrant." 
To  these  they  added  some  arguments  against  the  instances 
from  Acts  XV.,  and  Matt,  xviii.,  which  had  been  adduced 
by  the  Assembly. 

In  the  reasonings  of  the  Dissenting  Brethren,  it  is  some- 
what curious  to  observe  that  they  m.ade  use  of  both  the 
Erastian  and  the  Episcopalian  arguments,  as  these  seemed 
to  serve  their  purpose  ;  as,  for  instance,  the  Erastian, 
"Why  may  not  all  other  churches  be  governed  as  vv^ell  as 
that  of  Geneva,  without  appeals,  if  the  magistrate  oversees 
them,  and  keeps  each  to  their  duties  1"*  The  Episcopa- 
lian argument  is  not  so  succinctly  stated  ;  but  it  is  an  at 
tempt  to  turn  against  the  Presbyterians  the  argument  used 
by  them  against  the  Episcopalians,  of  the  want  of  an  ex- 
press institution  of  the  subordination  of  office-bearers  in  the 
Church.  And,  in  the  course  of  their  argument  and  illus- 
trations, they  made  so  many  concessions,  that  it  is  rather 
difficult  to  conceive  on  what  their  final  opposition  rested. 
As,  for  instance,  they  admitted  "  that  synods  are  an  ordi- 
nance of  God  upon  all  occasions  of  difficulty  ;  that  all  the 
churches  of  a  province  may  call  a  single  congregation  to 
account  ;  that  they  may  examine  and  adm.onish,  and,  in 
case  of  obstinacy,  may  declare  them  to  be  subverters  of 
the  faith;  that  they  have  authority  to  determine  in  contro- 
versies of  faith;  that  they  may  deny  Church  communion  to 
an  offending  and  obstinate  congregation,  and  that  this  seii- 
tence  of  non-communion  may  be  enforced  by  the  authority 
of  the  civil  magistrate  ;  and  that  they  may  call  before 
them  any  person  within  their  bounds,  concerned  in  the 
ecclesiastical  business  before  them,  and  may  hear  and 
determine  such  causes  as  orderly  come  before  them."t 
Having  njade  so  many  and  such  important  concessions,  the 
Independents  might,  with  very  little  difficulty,  have  assent- 
ed   fully  to    the   Assembly's    propositions ;    and    probably 

*  Reasons  of  the  Dissenting  Brethren,  p.  124. 
t  Reasons  and  Answers,  p.  13?, 


WKSTMIjNsTF.R  asskmbly.  «  189 

would  have  done  so,  but  for  the  influence  of  intriguing 
politicians,  Avho  dreaded  nothinii^  so  much  as  an  early  and 
harmonioiis  adjustment  of  all  di (Terences  in  the  Assembly. 

The  answer  of  the  Assembly  began  by  laying  open  the 
essential  points  of  diti'erence,  which  consisted,  not  in  a 
denial  of  synods,  but  of  the  standing  use  of  them,  and 
their  subordination  to  one  another,  not  the  subordination 
of  congregations  to  them.  They  then  showed  that  thp 
main  argument  of  the  Independents  was  not  directed 
aL-ainst  the  proposition  of  the  Assembly,  but  against  a  pe- 
culiar construction  of  it  by  themselves,  and  that,  too,  a  con- 
struction disclaimed  by  the  Assembly.  Then,  as  in  their 
previous  answer,  they  proceed  to  consider  the  reasoning 
of  their  opponents,  sometimes  proving  that  these  ate  self- 
destructive,  and  confute  their  own  theory,  sometimes  point- 
ing out  their  fallacious  character,  and  sometimes  meeting 
them  by  a  distinct  and  irresistible  refutation  of  a  strictly 
logical  kind.  In  one  instance,  the  mode  of  the  Dissenting 
Brethren's  argument  is  very  strongly  urged  against  them- 
selves ;  and  since  they  demand  "  the  greatest  and  most 
express  warrant  for  the  subordination  of  synods,"  they  are 
asked  to  prove  their  own  system,  viz.,  the  gathering  of 
churches  out  of  churches,  the  ordination  and  deposition 
of  ministers  by  the  people  alone,  the  passing  by  one  single 
congregation  of  the  sentence  of  non-communion  against 
all  the  churches  in  a  province  or  a  kingdom,  which  would 
surely  require  a  warrant  as  great  and  exp.'ess,  or  should 
teach  them  somewhat  to  abate  in  their  demand.*  In  short, 
it  is  perfectly  clear,  in  our  apprehension,  that  both  in  point 
of  conformity  to  the  language  and  arrangements  of  Scrip- 
ture, and  in  point  of  distinctness  and  strength  of  logical 
reasoning,  the  answer  of  the  Assembly  is  abundantly  con- 
clusive. 

The  third  subject  against  which  the  Independents  enter- 
ed reasons  of  dissent  in  writing  was,  the  proposition  con- 
cerning the  power  of  ordination.  That  proposition  was  in 
the  following  terms  : — "It  is  very  requisite,  that  no  single 
congregation  that  can  conveniently  associate,  do  assume 
to  itself  all  and  sole  power  in  ordination."  Against  thjg 
they  offered  these  reasons :  "Where  there  is  a  sufficient 
presbytery,  all  and  sole  power  in  ordination  may  be  as 
•  Reasons  and  Answers,  p.  147. 


19C     ^  HISTORY    OF    THE 

sumed,  though  association  may  be  had  ;  but  there  may  be 
a  sufficient  presbytery  in  a  particular  congregation  j  there- 
fore a  particular  congregation  may  assume  all  and  sole 
power  in  ordination.  That  which  two  apostles,  being 
joined  together,  might  do  in  a  particular  congregation, 
that  ordinary  elders  may  do  in  a  particular  congregation  : 
but  Paul  and  Barnabas  ordained  elders  in  particular  con- 
gregations, though  they  might  associate;  therefore  ordi- 
nary elders  may  ordain  in  particular  congregations."*  The 
expansion  of  this  argument  served  only  to  dilute  it  the 
more,  and  to  make  its  fallacy  apparent. 

In  their  answer,  the  Assembly  Divines  seem  almost  to 
have  been  ashamed  to  analyze  and  expose  the  weak  sophis- 
try of  the  Dissenting  Brethren's  argument.  "We  expect- 
ed," say  they,  "  from  our  brethren,  in  a  search  for  truth, 
not  a  contest  for  victory,  arguments  to  prove.  That  every 
single  congregation  have  the  whole  power  of  ordination 
within  themselves,  and  that  none  but  themselves  may  ordain 
for  them  :  but  this  they  are  pleased  to  decline."  They 
then  prove  that  the  argument  is  illogical  and  vicious,  con- 
taining more  in  the  conclusion  than  in  the  premises,  and 
yet  not  concluding  against  the  proposition  in  debate  ;  and, 
entering  into  a  more  minute  examiuation  of  it,  they  not 
merely  refute  it,  but  by  availing  themselves  of  the  conces- 
sions made  by  the  Independents  in  the  course  of  their  own 
illustrations,  they  completely  overthrow  the  whole  congre- 
gational theory.  For  the  Independents  had  admitted  that 
association  of  congregations  neither  adds  to  nor  dimi- 
nishes the  power  of  a  presbytery,  but  is,  by  vvay  of  accu- 
mulation, not  privation  ;  and  this  argument  is  itself  an 
answer  to  all  their  own  accusations  against  the  Presbyte- 
rian system  of  Church  government,  on  the  ground  of  its 
depriving  congregations  of  their  due  power,  since  the  as- 
sociation of  congregations,  like  that  of  elders,  is  by  way 
of  accumulation,  not  privation.  It  will  be  observed  also,* 
that  there  is  in  the  argument  of  the  Independents,  a  decep- 
tive use  of  the  word  presbytery,  which  they  employed  to 
mean  the  elders  of  a  particular  congregation,  whereas  the 
proper  sense  of  the  term  implies  the  collected  ministerg 
and  elders  of  several  contiguous  congregations.     The  aii- 

*  Reasons  of  Dissent,  pp.  190,  191. 


"WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBLY. 


m 


Bsret  of  siich  arguments  was  an  easy  task,  and  was   very 
successfully  accomplished. 

These  Reasons  of  Dissent,  and  the  Answers  by  the  As- 
sembly, occupied  the  attention  of  that  venerable  body  dur- 
ino-  the  conclusion  of  the  year  1644,  and  the  early  part  of 
the  year  1645  ;  and  when  fully  completed,  both  the  reasons 
and  the  answers  were  submitted  to  the  consideration  of 
the  Parliament.  After  remaining  in  possession  of  the  Par- 
liament for  a  considerable  time,  and  when  the  discussions 
of  the  Assembly  had  terminated,  an  order  was  issued  by 
the  House  of  Lords,  on  the  ^ith  January,  1648  (or  1647, 
according  to  their  style),  that  these  reasons  and  answers 
should  be  printed  from  the  papers  in  the  hands  of  Adoni- 
ram  Byfield,  one  of  the  Assembly's  scribes,  and  after  hav- 
ing been  inspected  by  Messrs.  Goodwin  and  W  hittaker  to 
secure  their  genuineness  and  authenticity  5  and  they  were 
published  in  the  same  year,  under  the  title  of  |' The  Rea- 
sons presented  by  the  Dissenting  Brethren  against  certain 
Propositions  concerning  Presbyterial  Government  ;  toge- 
ther with  the  Answers  of  the  Assembly  of  Divines  to  those 
Reasons  of  Dissent."  In  the  year  1652,  the  same  publica- 
tion received  a  new  title-page,  and  was  called  "  The  Grand 
Debate  concerning  Presbytery  and  Independency,  by  the 
Assembly  of  Divines  convened  at  Westminster  by  authori- 
ty of  Parliament."  This  a  careful  examination  of  several 
copies  of  both  dates  and  titles  enables  me  to  state  with 
perfect  certainty,  not  only  the  pages,  but  the  verbal  and 
literal  errors  being  everywhere  identical  ;  and  this  is  here 
mentioned  in  order  to  put  it  in  the  power  of  any  person 
who  may  possess  the  volume  to  verify  the  preceding  ac- 
count, whether  as  here  given,  or  as  referred  to  by  other 
authors  under  the  title  of  "The  Grand  Debate." 

About  the  time  when  these  written  discussions  began  to 
be  interchanged,  there  was  one  remaining  topic  unsettled, 
on  which  some  difference  of  opinion  Avas  entertained.  The 
Assembly  had  unanimously  agreed,  that  "  excommunica- 
tion is  an  ordinance  of  Christ  ;"  but  some  diflerence  of 
opinion  existed  respecting  the  body  to  which  properly  the 
power  of  excommnni  ration  belonged.  A  small  committee 
was  appointed  for  the  purpose  of  attempting  an  accommo- 
dation between  the  Presbyterians  and  Independents  on  thif 
point  I  and  on  the  10th  January,  1645,  this  commiitfre  gave 


13:2  insTOKv  of  the 

in  a  report  to  which  all  assented,  and  it  received  the  unani- 
mous and  glad  sanction  of  the  Assembly.  Four  days  after* 
wards,  the  Independents  requested  that  the  whole  directo- 
ry of  excommunication  might  be  referred  to  a  similar  com- 
mittee of  accommodation  ;  and  this,  too,  the  Assembly 
granted,  in  the  hope  of  at  last  obtaining  an  amicable  and 
harmonious  arrangement.  Yet,  when  the  report  of  that 
committee  had  been  produced,  assented  to  by  the  Assem- 
bly, and  voted  to  be  transmitted  to  the  Houses  of  Parlia- 
ment, the  Independents  entered  their  dissent  from  it,  as  an 
accommodation  "  in  any  otlier  sense  than  that  each  might 
interpret  and  use  it  according  to  their  ovrn  peculi.-nr 
vievvs."*  Against  this  procedure  the  Assembly  complained, 
regarding  it  as  a  deceptive  evasion,  much  more  fitted 
to  perpetuate  disagreement  than  to  promote  accommoda- 
tion, and  lead  to  union. 

The  Assembly  further  complained,  that  the  Dissenting 
Brethren  never  gave  any  definite  statement  of  what  they 
really  wished,  but  merely  opposed  almost  every  proposition 
respecting  Church  government,  and  brought  forward  ob- 
jections. At  length  one  of  the  Independents,  on  the  11th 
of  February,  1645,  said  that  they  were  willing  to  be  formed 
into  a  committee  to  frame  and  report  their  judgment  re- 
specting the  best  model  of  Church  government.  This  the 
Assembly  gladly  hailed,  declaring  that  there  was  nothing 
which  they  more  earnestly  desired  than  to  know  the  full 
mind  and  wish  of  the  Dissenting  Brethren.  Immediately 
the  Independents  recoiled  from  their  proposal,  and  declined 
being  made  a  committee  for  that  purpose.  On  the  21st 
of  March  the^^  were  urged  to  enter  upon  the  task,  and  one 
of  them  read  a  paper  containing  seven  propositions,  but 
refused  to  give  it  to  the  scribe,  would  not  reproduce  it, 
and  finally  declined  the  discussion.  Again,  on  the  4th  of 
April,  the  Assembly  resumed  the  suggestion,  and  notwith- 
standing the  opposition  of  the  Independents,  resolved, 
"  That  the  brethren  of  this  Assembly  that  had  formerly 
entered  their  dissent  to  the  propositions  about  Presbyterial 
government,  shall  be  a  committee  to  bring  in  the  whole 
frame  of  their  judgment  concerning  Church  government 
in  a  body,  with  their  grounds  and  reasons."!     Being  thus 

•  Answer  to  a  Copj^  of  a  Remonstrance,  p.  16. 

♦  A:iswer  to  a  CopV  of  a  llemonslrance,  p.  19  ;  Baillie,  vol.  m.  pfi 


\\ESTMIKSTER    ASSEMBLY.  193 

in  a  manner  constrained  to  prepare  their  own  desired  mo- 
de., they  first  requested  that  it  might  be  brought  forward 
and  debated  part  by  part,  as  the  subject  of  Presbyteriai 
government  had  been.  To  this  the  Assembly  objected, 
both  because  their  own  course  of  procedure  had  been  that 
of  necessity,  not  choice,  and  not,  in  their  opinion,  the  best 
mode,  and  because  there  were  not  many  points  against 
which  the  Independents  had  dissented,  so  that  the  whole 
might  most  easily  and  conveniently  be  brought  forward  at 
once.  The  Independents  then  obtained  permission  to 
refrain  from  attending  the  ordinary  committees,  that  they 
might  have  sufficient  leisure  to  prepare  their  own  model 
of  Church  government.  Long  and  anxiously  did  the  As- 
sembly look  for  the  promised  model,  but  in  vain.  Wearied 
at  last  with  this  protracted  delay,  on  the  22d  of  September, 
they  urged  the  Independents  to  make  all  convenient  speed, 
and  requested  them  to  give  in  a  report  of  what  they  had 
done,  within  a  fortnight  if  possible. 

One  fortnight  passed,  and  no  report  was  produced  ;  ano- 
ther ran  its  round,  and  still  no  report  appeared.  But,  on  the 
2'2d  of  October,  1645,  instead  of  the  long-expected  model  of 
Church  government,  the  Independents  laid  before  the  As- 
sembly what  they  termed  a  Remonstrance,  stating  the  rea- 
sons why  they  declined  to  bring  forward  their  model  of 
Church  government.  This  was  soon  afterwards  published, 
without  the  authority  of  either  Assembly  or  Parliament, 
under  the  title  of  "A  Copy  of  a  Remonstrance."  The  As- 
sembly immediately  prepared  an  answer  to  this  remon- 
strance ;  and  having  laid  it  before  the  Houses  of  Parlia- 
ment, it  was,  after  some  delay,  directed  to  be  printed,  by 
an  order  of  the  House  of  Lords,  bearing  date  24th  F(  bruarj^, 
1646  (or,  according  to  the  parliamentary  year,  1645).* 
The  answer  of  the  Assembly  is  expressed  in  somewhat 
sharper  terms  than  any  of  their  preceding  papers,  which 
is  not  surprising,  considering  the  disingenuous  and  evasive 
conduct  of  the  Independent  party  j  and  it  certainly  exposes 
their  duplicity  in  a  manner  altogether  unanswerable.  The 
conclusion  of  this  paper  is  peculiarly  significant :  "  Upon 
which  considerations  we  think,  not  that  the  brethren  have 
any  cause  to  decline  the  bringing  in  of  their  model  at  this 
linae,  but  that  they  have  some  other  cause  than  what  they 
♦  Baillie,  vol.  iii.  p.  344. 
17 


194  HISTORY    OF    THE 

pretend  to,  and  that  something  lies  behind  die  curtain 
which  doth  not  yet  appear:  possibly  not  any  one  of  them 
is  yet  at  a  point  in  his  own  judgment,  nor  resolved  where 
to  fix,  they  having  professed  to  keep  as  a  reserve,  liberty 
to  alter  and  retract,  which,  if  their  model  were  given  in, 
they  could  not  so  fairly  and  honorably  do  ;  or  possibly  they 
are  not  all  fixed  in  one  and  the  same  point:  possibly  ihey 
cannot  agree  among  themselves,  for  it  is  easier  to  agree  in 
dissenting  than  in  affirming;  or  possibly  if  they  seven  can 
agree,  yet  some  other  of  their  brethren  in  the  city,  to  whom 
it  may  be  the  model  was  communicated,  did  not  like  it; 
or  if  so,  yet  possibly  the  brethren  might  foresee,  that  if 
this  model  should  be  published,  there  are  some  who  at  pre- 
sent are  a  strength  to  them,  and  expect  shelter  from  them, 
who  may  disgust  it.  Or,  at  least,  they  are  resolved  to  wait 
a  further  opportunity  to  improve  what  they  have  prepared, 
it  may  be  when  the  Assembly  is  dissolved,  and  so  not  in  a 
capacity  to  answer  them  ;  or  when  the  Presbyterian  gov- 
ernment begins  to  be  set  up,  when  they  promise  to  them- 
selves there  will  be  discontent  among  the  people,  and  look 
Hpon  that,  it  may  be,  as  the  most  advantageous  time  of 
putting  pen  to  paper.  But  whatever  the  cause  be,  we 
commit  our  cause  to  the  Lord,  who  loves  truth  and  simpli- 
city, and  will,  we  doubt  not,  discover  it  in  due  time."* 

Ahnost  simultaneous  with  the  production  of  these  pa- 
pers, one  effort  more,  a  last  effort,  was  made  to  prevent, 
if  possible,  a  final  disagreement  between  the  Presbyterians 
and  the  Independents.  The  Committee  of  Accommoda- 
tion, which  had  been  in  abeyance  for  nearly  a  year,  was 
revived  by  an  order  of  both  Houses  of  Parliament,  dated 
6th  November,  1645.  This  Committee  met  on  the  JTth  of 
tlie  same  month,  and  resumed  their  now  well-nigh  hopeless 
task,  to  find  some  ground  on  which  both  parties  could  har- 
moniously unite.  Several  meetings  were  held,  and  several 
papers  framed  by  each  party,  but  no  approximation  to- 
wards union  appeared,  both  retaining  their  peculiar  views, 
vv^ith  little,  if  any  modification.  The  last  meeting  took 
place  on  the  9th  of  March,  1646,  v.dien  very  Ions:  and  elabo- 
rate answers  were  produced  by  the  members  of  Assem- 
bly to  the  opinions,  reasonings,  and  requests  of  the  Dis- 
senting Brethren.  After  that  the  committee  met  no  more  j 
*  Answer  to  a  Copy  of  a  Remonstrance,  p.  24. 


WnSTIMLNSTER    ASSEMBLY.  195 

the  controversy,  so  far  as  rep^arded  debate  and  writing, 
terminated  without  any  agreement ;  and  the  matter  be- 
came a  conflict  of  principle  against  intrigue  and  power. 

It  is  impossible  to  review  this  protracted  controversy 
between  the  Presbyterians  and  the  Independents  without 
the  deepest  regret.  From  the  very  beginning  it  greatly 
hampered  the  proceedings  of  the  Assembly,  gave  rise  to 
excessively  protracted  discussions  on  almost  every  subject 
connected  with  Church  government  and  discipline,  expos- 
ed the  unsettled  affairs  of  both  Church  and  State  to  all  the 
perils  of  delay,  and  gave  time  to  every  hostile  element  to 
acquire  matured  strength,  and  every  dangerous  machina- 
tion to  obtain  complete  development.  Yet  the  diiferen- 
ces  between  the  two  contending  parties  do  not  appear  to 
have  been  necessarily  irreconcilable,  had  it  not  been  for 
the  perverting  power  of  political  influence,  in  point  of 
doctrinal  views  of  sacred  truth  and  modes  of  public  wor- 
ship tiiere  existed  no  material  disagreement  between  the 
Presbyterians  and  the  independents.  In  matters  of  disci- 
pline, the  diflerence  of  opinion  became  narrowed  to  a  sin- 
j^le  point,  and  even  that  point  was  at  one  time  removed  in 
the  Committee  of  Acconimodation,  though  it  was  again 
martially  replaced  by  the  Dissenting  Brethren.  The  three 
propositions  against  which  they  gave  in  reasons  of  dissent, 
namely,  concerning  presbyterial  government,  the  subordi- 
nation of  assemblies,  and  the  power  of  ordination,  were  all 
capable  of  being  reduced  to  one  point  also, — and  that  a 
point  so  minute  as  almost  to  disappear  under  discussion, 
and  to  require  considerable  dexterity  in  its  maintainers  to 
(discover,  and  again  bring  it  into  prominent  manifestation. 
For  the  admissions  of  the  Independents  at  different  times 
extended  so  far  as  to  leave  nothing  in  dispute,  except  the 
single  link  connecting  their  system  with  that  of  the 
Brownists,  and  the  other  Sectarians  of  the  period, — the 
right  of  a  congregation  or  church  to  use  their  own  term, 
however  few  in  regard  to  numbers,  and  even  though  de- 
void of  a  pastor  and  elders,  to  possess  and  to  exercise  all 
and  sole  power  of  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction  within  itself, 
without  regard  to  any  and  every  other  church  in  the 
world,  and  accountable  to  none  for  its  procedure,  be  that 
what  it  might. 

How  the  Independents  contrived   to  reconcile  this  cen 


196  IIISTOKY  OF    THE 

tral  principle  with  their  repeated  concessions  respecting 
the  authority  of  synods,  as  an  ordinance  of  God,  the  sen- 
tences of  which  might  he  enforced  by  the  civil  magistrate, 
it  is  somevrhat  difficult  to  imagine.  Nor  did  they,  in  point 
of  practice,  act  according  to  this  principle  or  theory  ;  lor 
in  the  churches  of  New  England,  which  were  all  construct- 
ed according  to  the  Independent  system,  they  did  not 
hesitate  to  coerce  and  restrain,  with  great  rigor  and  seve- 
rity, those  who  presumed  to  differ  from  them,  in  religious 
matters — inflicting  the  sentences  of  imprisonment,  banish- 
ment, and  even  perpetual  slavery.*  Yet  had  they  acted 
according  to  their  own  theory,  they  ought  to  have  passed 
no  other  sentence  than  that  of  non-communion,  each  little 
church  of  half-a-dozen  having  sole  power  in  itself,  and 
being  independent  of  every  other.  But  in  New  England, 
where  their  system  had  at  first  freedom  to  put  forth  its 
native  tendencies,  it  was  found  to  be  absolutely  incom- 
patible with  the  peace  and  good  order  of  society  ;  and 
therefore,  the  very  necessity  and  duty  of  self-preservation 
constrained  the  Independents  of  that  country  to  maake  such 
alterations^in  their  system  as  might  save  them  from  total 
disorganization.  There  is  reason  to  believe,  that  the  con- 
sciousness of  these  inherent  defects  in  their  system  ope- 
rated very  powerfully  in  causing  the  Dissenting  Brethren 
to  make  the  numerous  and  important  concessions  which 
have  been  stated  ;  and  that  they  would  have  finally  em- 
braced the  Presbyterian  form  of  Church  government,  but 
for  the  existence  of  one  or  two  most  unfortunate  and  inju- 
rious preventive  causes.  They  had  become  involved  in 
the  political  movements  of  the  period,  chiefly  through  the 
intriguing  character  of  Nye,  and  the  infliience  of  Cromweil 
and  Sir  Harry  Vane  ;  and  the  position  which  they  occupied 
in  the  Assemblj^  rendered  them  in  a  manner  the  represen- 
tatives of  the  almost  innumerable  swarms  of  Sectarians 
with  which  the  kingdom  was  rife. 

Both  of  these  causes  operated  so  steadily  in  the  same 
direction  that  they  may  be  viewed  as  one,  and  the  eriect 
may  be  thereby  the  more  clearly  traced.  The  civil  war 
between  the  King  and  the  Parliament  had  not  continued 
long  till  It  began  to  become  apparent  that  it  would  most 
probably  end  in  a  revolution,  and  a  change  of  the  form  of 
*  Baillie,  vol.  ii.  p.  183. 


civil  government.  Wliether  this  had  been  foreseen  frorr 
the  first  by  Cromwell,  and  his  own  conduct  guided  by  that 
anticipation,  cannot  be  certainly  known  ;  but  this,  at  least, 
may  be  safely  said,  that  such  an  idea  would  enable  us  to 
give  a  complete  explanation  of  all  tlie  proceedings  of  that 
otherwise  most  mysterious  man.  Let  it,  then,  be  assumed 
that  such  was  his  aim  and  expcitation.  Nothing  could 
have  been  more  fatal  to  this  prospect  than  an  early  and 
amicable  settlement  of  a  pure,  iree  and  comprehensive 
system  of  Church  government,  whether  that  had  been  a 
modified  Episcopacy  on  Ussher's  model,  or  a  Presbyterian 
form,  similar  to  that  of  Scotland.  In  either  case  the  life 
and  sovereignty  of  the  king  would  have  been  preserved, 
even  in  spite  of  his  own  characteristic  obstinacy,  and  peace 
would  have  been  restored  to  the  country  without  an  abso- 
lute revolution.  It  was  therefore  Cromwell's  policy  to 
prevent,  by  every  possible  means,  an  early  settlement  of 
the  great  religious  questions  by  which  the  heart  of  the 
community  was  so  deeply  and  powerfully  stirred.  For  this 
ptirpose  he  maintained  a  secret  but  a  close  intercourse 
with  Nye,  and  induced  him  and  the  other  Dissenting 
Brethren  to  exert  themselves  to  the  utmost  in  retarding 
the  progress  of  the  Assembly.  When  that  could  no  longer 
be  accomplished  by  mere  debate,  then  he  devised  the  Com- 
mittee of  Accommodation,  by  means  of  which  new  methods 
of  delay  were  employed.  In  the  meantime  he  availed  him- 
self of  the  rapid  increase  of  Sectarians,  encouraged  their 
enthusiastic  feelings,  new-modelled  the  army,  placing  them 
in  its  ranks  and  himself  at  its  head  ;  then,  having  su^ept  the 
loose  and  disorderly,  though  daring,  cavaliers  of  Charles 
from  the  field,  he  was  able  to  dissolve  the  Parliament, 
break  up  the  Assembly,  assume  an  absolute  dictatorship  in 
all  matters,  civil  and  religious,  and  become  the  chief  of  a 
reptiblic  or  commonwealth. 

Such,  certainly,  was  the  issue  ;  and  it  will  not  be  denied, 
that  the  outline  we  have  traced  shows  how  all  these  events 
combined  to  lead  as  directly  to  the  result  as  if  they  had 
been  all  preconcerted  and  prearranged  in  the  pow^erful  mind 
of  one  bold  and  far-forecasting  man.  It  was  easy  for  such 
a  man  to  overreach  the  simple-minded,  and  to  employ  the 
crafty,  for  the  promotion  of  his  own  purposes,  leading 
them  all  the  while  to  imagine  that  they  could  not  possibly 
17* 


198  HISTORY  OF  THE 

better  secure  the  triumph  of  their  peculiar  designs;  and  it 
may  be  fairly  supposed  that  Cromwell  did  deceive  the  In- 
dependent divines,  and  make  use  of  them  for  the  accomplish- 
ment of  an  object  which  they  had  never  contemplated,  and 
from  the  very  thought  of  which  they  would  have  instanta- 
neously recoiled.  Yet  so  deeply  was  Nye  implicated  in 
the  political  intrigues  of  Cromwell,  that  after  the  Restora- 
tion, it  was  debated  for  several  hours  in  council,  whether 
he  should  be  excepted  from  the  act  of  indemnhy,  aiid 
expiate  his  conduct  by  the  forfeit  of  his  life.*  But  what- 
ever Nye  might  have  known  of  Cromwell's  secret  schemes, 
and  though  his  brethren  were  greatly  led  by  him  in  the 
course  which  they  followed,  there  is  no  reason  to  believe 
that  they  were  fully  aware  of  the  object  which  he  had  in 
view,  or  would  have  approved  it  if  they  had.  Certainly 
Goodwin,  Burroughs,  and  Bridge,  were  men  of  too  pure 
and  spiritual  a  mould  to  have  lent  themselves  consciously 
to  the  promotion  of  any  merely  political  intrigue. f 

There  was  also  evidently  not  a  little  of  prejudice  and 
jealousy  on  both  sides.  The  Dissenting  Brethren  had 
suffered  so  much  from  prelatic  despotism,  that  they  enter- 
tained a  perfect  horror  of  all  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction, 
even  to  a  most  absurd  extent,  rendering  them  incapable  of 
calm  deliberation  on  the  subject.  And,  on  the  other  hand, 
the  Presbyterians  were  so  shocked  with  the  blasphemous 
tenets  and  enormous  immoralities  of  many  of  the  Sectari- 
ans, that  they  were  excited  to  use  the  language  of  intole- 
rance, in  their  earnest  desire  to  procure  the  suppression  of 
those  pernicious  errors  ;  and  they  were  led  also  to  regard 
with  considerable  distrust  the  requests  of  the  Independents 
for  toleration,  in  consequence  of  the  position  which  they 
occupied,  as  in  some  measure  the  representatives  of  the 
Sectarians,  whose  wild  and  dangerous  opinions  and  prac- 
tices might,  as  they  dreaded,  be  sanctioned  under  a  general 
toleration.       Neither  party  took  a   sufficiently  comprehen- 

*  Palmer's  Non-Conformist's  Memorial,  vol.  i.  p.  96. 

t  This  I  hold  myself  quite  at  liberty  to  state,  from  a  careful  perusal 
of  the  writinsfs  of  these  pious  men  ;  and  especially  from  Goodwin's  work 
"On  the  Constitution,  Right,  Order,  and  Government,  of  the  Churches 
of  Christ,"  in  the  fourth  volume  of  his  works  ;  which  seems  to  be  the 
result  of  his  altem])t  to  frame  a  model  of  the  Independent  system  of 
Church  s;overnment,  and  which,  with  all  its  defects,  shews  much  of  a 
Christian  spirit  and  temper. 


WESTMINSTER  ASSEIMRLY.  199 

sive  view  of  their  own  position  and  that  of  their  opponents, 
and  consequently  both  parties  erred,  and  contributed  to 
each  other's  final  overthrow,  when,  at  (he  Restoration,  their 
common  enemy  was  placed  again  in  the  possession  of 
supreme  power.  Their  treatment  of  each  other  was  mu- 
tually destructive,  and  we  cannot  exculpate  either  parly 
from  blame,  though  we  think  the  Independents  were  the 
most  culpable.  And  it  is  but  justice  to  stale,  that,  of  the 
Scottish  commissioners,  Baillie  alone  expressed  himself 
with  bitterness  against  the  Independents;  the  rest  making 
many  an  earnest  attempt  to  allay  hostility  and  promote 
harmony.  But  Baillie  was  himself  tinged  with  prelalic 
feelings,  and  had  a  tendency  to  political  intrigues  ;  as  be- 
came apparent  when  he  joined  the  Resolutioners  in  the 
contest  which  divided  and  overthrew  the  Church  of 
Scotland. 

Some  very  i-mportant  lessons  may  be  learned  from  the 
errors  of  the  contending  parties  in  the  Westminster  As- 
sembly. Whenever  divines  intermeddle  with  political 
affairs,  they  become  both  the  tools  and  the  victims  of 
diplomatic  craft,  and  promote  their  own  ruin.  A  Church 
totally  disjoined  from  the  State,  and  even  incapable  of 
junction  with  it,  is  not  more,  perhaps  it  is  less,  free  from 
the  dangers  of  political  contamination  and  injury,  than  one 
already  established,  or  treating  about  the  terms  of  an  esta- 
blishment. Such  was  the  fate  of  the  Independents  two 
hundred  years  ago,  equally  with  that  of  the  Presbyterians  ; 
and  the  Dissenters  of  both  England  and  Scotland  of  the 
present  day  will  admit,  that  they  have  received  nothing  but 
injury  from  their  political  connections,  Avhile  the  Scottish 
Presbyterian  Church  has  to  encounter  the  hostility  of  all 
political  parties.  If  ever  a  thorough  and  cordial  union  of 
evangelical  Christians  be  formed,  it  must  be  kept  perfectly 
free  from  the  perverting  influence  of  secular  considerations, 
— an^  especially  from  the  intrigues  of  worldly  politicians. 
Christian  Churches  w^ill  find  it  possible  to  agree  exactly  in 
proportion  as  they  are  pure  and  spiritual  ;  and  ^vhere  that 
is  not  the  case,  any  agreement  will  be  but  a  deceitful  truce 
or  an  armed  neutrality, — incapable  of  producing  a  lasting 
peace,  and  liable  at  any  moment  to  be  changed  into  keen 
and  implacable  hostility. 


CHAPTER    IV. 

THE  ERASTIAN  CONTROVERSY,    164^5-6. 

Erastians  in  the  Assembly  and  in  Parliament — Theories  held  by  them— 
Beginning  of  the  Controversy — Excommunication — Selden's  Argu- 
ment— Answered  by  Gillespie — Discussion  on  the  Doctrinal  Part  of 
the  Directory  for  Ordination — Whitelocke's  Argument — Firmness  and 
Triumph  of  the  iVssembly — Debate  in  Parliament  on  the  subject  of 
the  Jus  Divinum — Whitelocke — Suspending  from  the  Sacrament — 
Debate  in  Parliament — Selden  and  Whitelocke— Remarks — Continued 
Struggle  with  the  Parliament — Ordinance  on  Suspending  from  Com- 
munion, and  Erastian  element  in  it — Firm  Conduct  of  the  Assembly 
and  the  City  Ministers — Ordinance  for  the  Election  of  Ruling  Elders 
and  the  Erection  of  Presbyteries,  and  Erastian  element  in  it — Inter- 
position of  the  Scottish  Commissioners  of  Parliament — Haughty  Con- 
duct of  the  English  Parliament — Boldness  of  the  Assembly — Questions 
respecting  the  Jufi  Divinum — Main  Proposition  oi'  the  Assembly's 
Answer  Destructive  of  the  Erastian  Principle — General  Answer — 
Change  in  the  Temper  of  Parliament,  and  One  Point  Yielded  to  the 
Assembly — Bearing  of  Political  Events  in  the  Parliament's  Conduct — 
The  King  Surrendered — Vindication  of  Scotland's  Conduct — First 
Meeting  of  the  Synod  of  London — And  of  Lancashire — Last  Votes  of 
Parliament  on  the  subject  of  Presbyterian  Church  Government — 
Discussion  concerning  the  Confession  of  Faith — Vindication  of  it 
from  the  Charge  of  beine:  Tainted  with  Erastianism — Ratified,  with 
some  Exceptions — The  Literature  of  the  Erastian  Controversy. 

There  were  in  the  Westminster  Assembly,  as  has  been 
already  stated,  three  parties,  the  Presbyterians,  the  Inde- 
pendents, and  the  Erastians.  In  the  preceding  chapter  our 
attention  has  been  almost  solely  occupied  with  the  Inde- 
pendent controversy ;  both  because  it  actually  occurred 
first  in  order  of  time,  and  because  it  seemed  expedient  to 
complete  a  general  view  of  it  before  entering  upon  the  con- 
sideration of  Erastianism,  although  some  discussions  on 
that  subject  were  intermingled  with  what  more  strictly 
related  to  the  prior  matter  of  debate.  And  in  order  to 
obtain  a  full  view  of  the  Erastian  controversy,  we  must 


WESTMINSTr.R    A.SSF.M1?LY.  201 

revert  a  little  to  its  beginnings,  some  of  which  occurred  at 
an  early  staple  of  the  Assembly's  deliberations,  ahhough 
the  main  strngole  with  the  Evastians  took  place  after  that 
with  the  Independents  had  virtually  terminated,  so  far  at 
least  as  the  Assembly  was  concerned. 

It  was  somewhat  ominous  of  evil,  that  the  very  calling 
of  the  Assembly  was  solely  the  deed  of  the  civil  power, 
and  that  their  deliberations  were  limited  to  such  matters 
as  should  be  proposed  to  them  by  the  Parliament.  Yet, 
in  the  universal  confusion  into  which  both  Church  and 
State  had  been  cast,  this  was  unavoidable,  and  might  not 
have  led  to  any  evil  consequences,  had  the  civil  govern- 
ment been  satisfied  with  the  due  exercise  of  their  own 
powers  in  calling  forth  and  putting  into  operation  the  re- 
medial energies  of  the  Church  in  its  own  sacred  province. 
Nor  was  it  strange,  that  men  who  had  so  recently  suffered 
so  much  from  prelatic  tyranny  should  regard  w^ith  alarm 
all  ecclesiastical  power  w^iatever,  and  by  the  strength  of  a 
violent  revulsion  and  rebound,  should  spring  to  the  oppo- 
site conclusion,  that  there  ought  to  be  no  power  or  juris- 
diction, except  that  of  the  cAvW  magistrate.  Such  appears 
to  have  been  the  predominant  state  of  mind  and  feeling 
among  the  members  of  the  Long  Parliament  in  general, 
toi^ether  with  the  peculiar  opinions  held  by  individuals, 
and  caused  by  their  diversities  of  studies  or  professional 
pursuits.  "  Most  of  the  lawyers,"  says  Baillie,  "  are  strong 
Erastians,  and  would  have  all  the  Church  government  de- 
pend absolutely  upon  the  Parliament."  And  of  Selden,  he 
says,  "  This  man  is  the  head  of  the  Erastians  ;  his  glory  is 
most  in  the  Jewish  learning  ;  he  avows  everywhere  that 
the  Jewish  State  and  Church  were  all  one,  and  that  so  in 
England  it  must  be,  that  the  Parliament  is  the  Church."* 
Lightfoot  and  Coleman,  the  only  Erastian  divines  in  the 
Assembly,  adopted  the  same  line  of  thought  and  argument 
with  Selden,  and  reasoned  from  the  blended  polity,  as  they 
affirmed  it  to  be,  which  prevailed  amon.g  the  Jews,  in  order 
to  maintain  that  a  similar  arrangement  should  exist  in 
Christian  States,  in  which  the  civil  magistrate,  being  a 
Christian,  ought  to  possess  and  wield  all  jurisdiction  both 
civil  and  ecclesiastical.  The  mere  lawyers,  on  the  other 
hand,  maintained  the  Erastian  theory  on  the  weaker  and 
•   Baillie,  vol.  ii.  p.  266. 


202  HISTORY    OF    THE 

more  easily  refuted  argument,  that  unless  the  civil  magi» 
trate  possessed  all  jurisdiction  there  would  arise  the  into 
lerable  anomaly  of  an  imperivm  in  imperiOj  one  indepen- 
dent government  within  another,  which  in  their  opinion 
would  be  fatal  to  all  good  government,  and  produce  inex- 
tricable confusion.' 

The  easy  connection  between  this  theory,  and  that  which 
had  long  prevailed  in  the  Church  of  England,  will  be  readily 
perceived.  The  ecclesiastical  supremacy  of  the  English 
monarchs  was  held  to  be  similar  to  that  which  had  been 
held  by  the  Jewish  kings,  and  by  the  Christian  emperors ; 
and  it  was  with  some  plausibility  argued,  that  these  formed 
authoritative  precedents  for  a  Christian  sovereign's  posses- 
sion and  exercise  of  jurisdiction  within  the  Church,  in  all 
matters  of  censure,  although  it  gave  no  authority  to  inter- 
fere in  the  administration  of  ordinances,  or  in  the  ordination 
or  deposition  of  ministers,  which  accordingly  were  left 
theoretically  free,  though  practically  they  were  subject 
to  the  most  absolute  control.  For  the  same  reason,  no  op- 
position was  made  by  the  Erastians  to  the  great  idea  stated 
by  the  Westminster  Assembly,  that  "  Christ,  who  is  pro- 
phet, priest,  king,  and  head  of  the  Church,  hath  fulhiess  of 
power,  and  containeth  all  other  offices  by  way  of  eminency 
in  himself;"  because  they  were  prepared  to  hold,  that  in  a 
Christian  State,  Christ  had  delegated  the  power  of  jurisdic- 
tion to  the  Christian  civil  magistrate,  defending  that  opinion 
by  the  analogy  of  the  Jewish  state  and  kings.  The  kind 
of  arguments  brought  forward  by  them  in  support  of  this 
theory,  and  the  counter-arguments  by  which  these  were 
met,  we  must  now  proceed  to  state,  which  we  shall  endea- 
vor to  do  with  all  possible  impartiality. 

It  will  be  evident  to  every  intelligent  reader,  that  the 
ground  taken  by  the  learned  and  able  Erastians  of  that 
period,  while  it  was  one  of  very  considerable  plausibility, 
led  them  to  assail  directly  that  element  of  Church  govern- 
ment which  involves  the  exercise  of  discipline,  or  Church 
censure;  because,  since  the  only  authority  which  a  Church 
can  possess  is  over  the  conscience,  the  only  way  in  which 
it  can  have,  and  exercise  jurisdiction,  is  by  spiritual  cen- 
sures directly  affecting  the  conscience  of  delinquents ;  so 
that  if  a  Church  cannot  inflict  censures,  it  cannot  possibly 
have  a  distinct  and  independent  government  of  its  OAvn. 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBLY. 


308 


The  Erastians  of  the  Parliament  were  aware  that  it  would 
be  absurd  for  them  to  call  themselves  a  Church,  in  the 
strict  sense  of  that  term,  and  consequently,  that  it  would 
be  absurd  to  pretend  that  they  could  themselves  admit  and 
ordain  ministrrs,  a  matter  which  manifestly  belongs  to  the 
function  of  Church  officers  ;  but  they  perceived  that  they 
mifi-ht  more  plausibly  and  successfully  assail  the  power  of 
infTicting  censures,  and  thereby  overthrow  Church  govern- 
ment on  the  ground  that  all  jurisdiction  belonged  to  the 
civil  mao:istrate,  even  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction  in  Chris- 
tian States,  though  they  admitted  that  it  might  properly 
be  held  and  exercised  by  the  Church  under  a  heathen 
government. 

The  Hrst  intimation  of  the  controversy  occurred  on  the 
8th  of  January,  1644,  when  the  second  committee  gave  in 
a  report  concerning  the  work  of  pastors,  to  the  following 
effect :— "  Pastors  and  teachers  have  power  to  inquire  and 
judge  who  are  fit  to  be  admitted  to  the  sacraments,  or  kept 
frorn  them  ;  and  also  who  are  to  be  excommunicated  or 
absolved  from  that  censure."  This  proposition  the  Eras- 
tians could  not  permit  to  pass  unchallenged  ;  and  therefore 
Selden  interposed,  and  "desired  that  the  business  of  ex- 
communication might  first  be  looked  upon,  for  that  very 
much  may  be  said  to  prove,  that  there  is  no  excommunica- 
tion at  all ;  and  for  that,  in  this  kingdom  ever  since  it  was 
a  kincrdom.  Christian  excommunication  hath  ever  been  by 
a  teniporal  power;  as  in  the  Pope's  rule  here,  his  own  ex- 
communication could  not  be  brought  in  hither,  but  by  per- 
mission of  the  secular  power,  otherwise  it  was  death  to  him 
that  brought  it ;  and  excepting  the  case  of  heresy  and 
cuncubitus  ilh'c'tus,  the  episcopacy  never  had  power  to  ex- 
communicate."* This  was  sufficiently  intelligible  ;  but 
thoucrh  the  Assembly  perceived  clearly  the  import  of  Sel- 
den's' remarks,  it  was  not  judged  expedient  to  enter  upon 
the  subject  precipitately  5  and  therefore  it  was  remitted  to 
the  second  committee  to  take  the  whole  business  of  excom- 
munication and  censures  into  consideration. 

Aithouffh  the  Assembly  did  not  wish  to  provoke  an  early 

discussion  with  the  Erastians,  and  especially  were  desirous 

to  have  as  many  points  ratified  as  might  be  possible,  before 

a  final  struggle  on  the  essential  elements  of  disagreement, 

♦  Lightfoot,  p.  106. 


^Q^  HisTony  of  the 

still  it  was  not  practicable  to  avoid  coming  into  collision 
whenever  the  controverted  topics  occurred  in  the  course  of 
debate.  Thus  the  question  respecting  excommunication 
again  arose  when  the  Assembly  were  debating  this  proposi- 
tion— "  Scripture  holdeth  forth  that  manj^  particular  congre- 
gations may  be  under  one  presbyterial  government ;"  for  the 
Independents  opposed  that  proposition  on  the  ground,  that 
it  would  destroy  the  rights  and  powers  of  particular  con- 
gregations in  the  important  point  of  maintaining  their  own 
purity  by  excommunicating  guilty  members,  since  the 
Scripture  rule,  as  they  argued,  is  "  in  the  presence  of  the 
people,"  which  cannot  take  place  if  a  Presbytery  excom- 
municate, and  must  therefore  be  done  by  a  single  congre- 
gation. During  the  greater  part  of  the  discussion  which 
folloAved  on  this  point,  the  Erasiians  continued  silent,  and 
allowed  the  Independents  to  bring  forward  every  argument 
which  they  could  devise,  being  quite  willing  that  the  Pres- 
byterian system  should  be  defeated  if  possible  by  the  Dis- 
senting Brethren,  whose  own  plan  they  would  themselves 
take  care  to  nullify.  But  when  the  Independent  arguments 
had  been  all  heard  and  answered  at  great  length,  Selden 
interposed,  and  brought  forward  his  own  view  in  the  fol- 
lowing manner,  as  given  by  Lightfoot,  who  concurred  with 
him,  and  whose  report  may  be  depended  on  as  stating  the 
argument  in  its  most  favorable  aspect. 

The  passage  of  Scripture  under  discussion  was  ]  Cor.  v. 
4  :  "In  the  name  of  our  Lord  Jesus,  when  ye  are  gathered 
together,  and  my  spirit,  with  the  power  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ."  "Mr.  Selden,"  says  Lightfoot,  "questioned 
whether  this  place  have  anything  to  do  with  excommuni- 
cation;  and  that  Cfvvuy6bi'io)v  vimv  Hdl  lov  tfwu  TTi'fvaarog^ 
must  be  joined  together  to  this  sense,  '  seeing  that  you 
and  my  spirit  are  together;'  or,  it  may  bear  this,  'when 
my  spirit  and  you  shall  come  together  ;'  or,  '  howsoever 
you  have  not  been  humbled  as  you  ought,  yet  my  spirit 
and  you  agreeing  now  at  last.'  And  so,  Neh.  iv.  8,  (rwij/- 
6t,(Tuv  is  meant,  and  is  of  the  same  sense  with  convenire^ 
either  in  loco^  or  animo.  And  he  cited  Faber  Stapulensis, 
that  takes  the  word  from  awaxBoi-iui^  to  mourn  or  grieve: 
Ergo^  there  being  so  many  interpretations,  it  is  not  fit  to 
build  upon.  This  epistle  is  written  to  the  Church  and  to 
the   saints,  where    the   Church    signifieth  the   governing 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBLV.  205 

body  of  the  Church.  2.  The  Jews  had  two  kinds  of  san- 
hedrims, the  great  and  the  less;  and,  Numb,  xxxv.,  the 
cono-regation  must  judge  the  heedless  murderer,  which 
the  Jews  generally  understood  of  nO-iS  T\^i:>^-,  and  Lev.  iv. 
13,  'If  the  whole  congregation  have  sinned,' — the  Jews 
constantly  understood  this  of  the  great  sanhedrim.  And 
so  might  the  presbytery  here,  though  ix-Ar,oia^  awaxOeiaiig 
had  been  the  phrase.  About  Jerusalem  it  was  still  called 
the  Church,  not  only  under  Judaism,  but  also  under  Chris- 
tianity. 3.  Ancient  times,  indeed,  have  called  excommu- 
nication '  giving  up  to  Satan,'  and  our  own  khigdom  hath 
called  the  excommunicated  person  '  the  devil's  person ;' 
but  for  the  first  three  hundred  years  most  (none  1)  of  the 
Fathers  take  this  place  for  excommunication  ;  and  he  also 
showed  that  P.  Molinos  proves  that  it  meaneth  no  such 
thing.  He  queried  whether  this  were  the  incestuous,  he 
that  is  mentioned  to  be  excommunicated  hereafter,  who  is 
called  'the  evil  person  to  be  taken  away,'  in  the  last 
verse,  where  many  copies  have  t«,  and  not  lov  TionjoovJ^ 

This  argument   produced  little   effect  upon  the  Assem 
bly,  and  after  Mr.  Vines  had   answered  it,  the  discussion 
with  the  Independents  was  resumed. 

Having  failed  on  this  point,  Selden  prepared  to  put  forth 
all  the  st'iength  of  his  rabbinical  lore  in  the  discussion  con- 
cerning the"  meaning  of  Matt,  xviii.  15-18,  which  was 
brought  forward  to  prove  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction,  and 
also  the  subordination  of  Church  courts,  and  successive 
appeals  ending  in  excommunication.  The  Independents 
had  admitted  that  the  passage  did  prove  jurisdiction  and 
Church  censure,  but  labored  to  limit  the  whole  procedure 
within  one  congregation,  so  as  to  deny  appeals  to  presby- 
teries. Selden  again  came  forward,  and  again  we  shall 
give  his  argument  as  reported  by  Lightfoot : — 

«  Mr.  Selden  confessed  that  he  could  not  find  any  kind  of  jniisdiction 
in  this  chapter :  and  he  told  a  story  of  a  Jesuit,  Xavier,  that  turns  the 
place  in  Persic,  '  Dicprvncipi  ecclesiae.'  Also,  that  all  the  Fathers  in 
the  first  times  do  ever  apply  this  text  to  jurisdiction,  hefore  Rome 
Church  grew  high,  namely,  not  in  the  first  four  centuries,  unless  it  be 
in  the  forsed  book  of  Cyprian,  de  abiisionibits  saeculi.  Then  he  offered 
these  things  :  1.  To  consider  the  time,  place,  and  way  of  writing  of  this. 
Matthew's  Gospel  was  first  ^v^itten,  viz.,  about  eight  years  after  Christ's 
ascension,  so  it  is  in  an  old  copy  of  Greek  used  by  Beza,  and  an  Arabic 
2.  It  is  conceived  it  was  written  in  Hebrew,  for  the  Hebrews,  and  ei 
•  Lightfoot,  pp.  153,  154. 
18 


206  HISTORY    OF    THE 

the  Sj'rian  T1 1;<'^  Now,  in  the  Hebrew  text  it  is  TM},^  in  these  two 
editions  we  have,  and  belike  in  Matthew's  ;  now  in  chapter  xvi.  it  is 
hr\p.  Now,  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  which  is  the  first  place  we  find 
ecclesia  in,  was  not  written  of  fourteen  years  after  this  of  Matthew. 
Now  the  course  of  admonition  amonsfthe  Jews  was  :  They  distinguished 
betwixt  offences  betwixt  man  and  man,  and  betwixt  man  and  God  ;  now 
he  that  had  been  oflended  by  man  was  to  go  single  and  desire  satisfac- 
tion ;  and  if  he  would   not  hearken,  then  take  more  company,  and   if 

yO)\y  irx  then  Un  lID'dS.  Now  every  one  of  the  courts  was  called 
mj-'.  Excommunication  amon?  the  Jews  might  be  inflicted  by  any  of 
twelve  years  old,  and  so, by  consequence,  every  court  might  do  it;  but 
the  synagogue  did  not  use  it ;  and  a7nj-7j)j/.iy(oyoc,  was  not  utterly  outlawed 
from  the  synagogue,  but  some  part  of  ordinary  free  conversation  denied 

him.  Now,  TM)^  /Hp,  ecclesia,  &c.,  must  be  interpreted  according  to 
the  occasion,  for  a  certain  number,  secundum  suhjectam   materiam,  as 

Deut.  xxiii., '  An  Ammonite  may  not  enter  7np2,  that  is,  of  women  ; 
for  the  Jews  understood  it  of  marrying  an  Israelitish  woman.  He  con- 
cluded that  this  place  might  very  well  mean  a  sanhedrim.  Christ  was  ia 
Capernaum  now,  when  he  spake  this,  where  there  was  a  sanhedrim. 
Now  his  speech  is  so  Jewish,  that  it  results  to  this,  If  an  Israelite  otfend 
thee,  tell  the  sanhedrim.  To  the  objection,  But  what  means  '  Let  him 
be  unto  thee  an  heathen  V  he  answered.  This  indeed  may  be  excommu- 
nication by  the  court  ;  or,  by  himself:  'If  thy  brother  offend,'  &,c.,  after 
such  and  such  admonition,  sue  him  at  the  court,  or  else  inform  of  him 
there  ;  if  he  will  not  obey  the  court,  do  thou  excommunicate  him.'^* 

Such  was  the  boasted  argument  of  the  man  emphatically 
styled  "  the  learned  Selden."  Its  object  was,  to  explain 
away  the  force  of  the  term  ecclesia^  or  church,  and  to  reduce 
the  passao^e  to  a  strictly  Jewish  application  ;  then,  by  allu- 
sions to  some  indefinite  Hebrew  customs,  to  resolve  the 
matter  into  a  mere  application  to  a  civil  court,  in  cases 
where  a  private  and  friendly  arrangement  could  not  be 
effected,  reducing,  at  the  same  time,  the  meaning  of  the 
term  excommunication,  into  the  act  of  one  person  merely 
declining  to  hold  intercourse  with  another  person  from 
whom  he  had  received  offence.  Yet  the  ostentatious  dis- 
play of  minute  rabbinical  lore  which  he  brought  forward, 
seems  to  ha\e  somewhat  staggered  the  Assembly,  as  ap- 
pears from  the  inconclusive  remarks  of  Herle  and  Marshall, 
as  reported  by  Lightfoot.  But  Gillespie  saw  through  the 
fallacious  character  of  Selden's  argument ;  and  in  a  speech 
of  singular  ability  and  power  completely  refuted  his  learued 

•  Lightfoot,  pp.  165,  166. 


WESTMINSTER  ASSEMBLY.  207 

antagonist,  proving  that  the  passage  could  not  be  inter 
preted  or  explained  away  to  mean  a  mere  reference  to  a 
civil  court.  By  seven  distinct  arguments  he  proved  that 
the  whole  subject  was  of  a  spiritual  nature,  not  within  the 
cognizance  of  civil  courts;  and  he  proved  also,  that  the 
Church  of  the  Jews  had  and  exercised  the  power  of  spi- 
ritual censures.  The  efiect  of  Gillespie's  speech  was  so 
great  as  to  astonish  and  confound  Selden  himself,  who 
made  no  attempt  to  reply  ;  and  the  result  was,  that  the 
Assembly  soon  afterwards  decided  that  the  negative  argu 
ments  of  Selden  and  the  Independents  were  not  conclusive, 
and  the  proposition  was  affirmed.* 

Closely  connected  with  this  subject  was  the  proposition 
which  asserted  "that  authoritative  suspension  from  the 
Lord's  table  of  a  person  not  yet  cast  out  of  the  Church,  is 
agreeable  to  the  Scripture  ;"  and  this  point  held  the  As- 
sembly in  debate  from  the  20th  to  the  24th  of  May,  1644, 
when  it  was  affirmed,  the  opposition  being  made  chiefly 
by  the  Independents,  while  the  Erastians  reserved  their 
strength  for  the  Parliament,  well  knowing  that  their  views 
would  coincide  with  the  notions  of  men  of  the  world,  and 
would  not  be  subjected  to  such  a  narrow  scrutinj^  there 
as  in  the  Assembly.  The  subject  will  come  before  us 
again,  when  we  come  to  treat  of  the  Parliament's  proceed- 
ings. 

It  was  mentioned  in  the  preceding  chapter,  that  when 
the  Assembly  had  completed  the  Directory  for  ordination, 
the  result  was  laid  before  the  Parliament  to  receive  its 
ratification,  that  it  might  have  the  authority  of  law  ;  and 
that  the  Parliament  allowed  it  to  lie  past  for  some  time, 
and  then  made  considerable  alterations  upon  it  before  re- 
turning it  to  the  Assembly,  which  they  did  on  the  I5th  ol 
August,  1644<.  These  alterations  were  so  many,  and  of 
such  importance,  striking  out  the  doctrinal  part  of  the  Di- 
rectory, that  the  Assembly  refused  to  consent  to  them, 
and  proceeded  to  debate  afresh  the  topics  so  altered  or 
struck  out.  Mr.  Whitelocke,  a  leading  member  of  the 
Commons,  entered  into  the  debate  ;  and  passing  from  the 
direct  point  in  hand,  made  a  long,  and  certainly  not  a  pe- 
culiarly able  speech  on  the  question,  whether  Presbyterial 
Church  government  be  jure  divino,  of  divine  institution 
*  See  before,  pp.  173,  174 ;  also  Appendix. 


208  HISTOKV    OF    THE 

He  admitted  that  Church  government,  in  the  abstract,  i« 
of  divine  institution,  but  held  it  doubtful  whether  any  pe- 
culiar form.  Episcopacy,  Presbytery,  or  Independency, 
can  claim  that  high  authority  ;  nor  did  he  think  it  of  any 
importance  to  determine  the  point,  because  no  decision 
could  alter  its  nature  ;  if  of  divine  institution,  it  would  re- 
main so,  whether  men  affirmed  it  or  not,  and  if  not  so,  the 
authority  of  man  could  not  elevate  it  to  that  height.  He 
advised  the  Assembly,  therefore,  to  be  content  with  stat- 
ing to  the  Parliament,  "  that  the  government  of  the  Church 
by  Presbyteries  is  most  agreeable  to  the  Word  of  God, 
and  most  fit  to  be  settled  in  this  kingdom."*  It  is  easy  to 
see  the  tact  of  the  politician  in  Whitelocke's  suggestion, 
which,  according  to  his  own  understanding  of  it,  left  it  in 
the  powder  of  the  civil  government  to  establish  any  form 
of  Church  government  of  which  they  might  approve,  and 
to  change  it  as  they  might  think  it  expedient ;  while,  if 
the  strictest  sense  of  the  words  were  held,  Presbj^terians 
might  very  properly  conclude  that  the  Church  government 
which  is  "  most  agreeable  to  the  Word  of  God,"  must 
therefore  be  of  divine  institution. 

But  the  Assembly  was  neither  to  be  overawed  nor  de- 
ceived in  this  matter.  Information  of  these  alterations 
was  communicated  to  the  Scottish  commissioners,  before 
it  was  made  known  to  the  Assembly  ;  the  effect  of  which 
was,  first  a  private  remonstrance  to  certain  of  the  Parlia- 
ment, and  then  a  preparation  for  a  strenuous  struggle  in 
the  Assembly  itself.f  The  Scottish  commissioners  further 
addressed  the  Grand  Committee  on  the  evils  resulting  from 
such  a  prolonged  delay,  in  the  conclusion  of  which  they 
expressly  condemned  the  Parliament's  alterations,  stating 
the  reasons  of  their  disapprobation.  This  bold  course  was 
seconded  by  a  petition  from  the  city  ministers,  on  the  18th 
of  September  ;  and  on  the  2d  October  the  Parliament  issued 
an  ordinance,  sanctioning  the  Assembly's  Directory  of  Or- 
dination, and  appointing  a  committee  of  Divines  to  ordain 
ministers  in  London.  The  difference  between  the  conduct 
of  the  Assembly  in  this  point,  and  the  manner  in  which 
they  acted  towards  the  Independents,  must  strike  every 
attentive  and  candid  reader.  Although  highly  disapprov- 
ing of  the  pertinacious  obstinacy  with  which  the  Dissent- 
•  Whitelocke,  p.  95.  f  BaiUie,  vol.  ii.  p.  198. 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBLY.  209 

ing  Brethren  clung  to  their  own  views,  and  threw  every 
possible  obstacle  in  the  way  of  an  early  and  satisfactory 
settlement  of  Church  government,  yet  the  Assembly  con- 
tinued to  treat  them  as  brethren,  bore  with  their  length- 
ened speeches  and  subtle  distinctions,  admitted  many  mo- 
difications of  their  own  opinions,  and  did  their  utmost  to 
procure  an  amicable  adjustment  of  all  dilTerences,  so  far  as 
the  conscientious  views  of  both  parties  could  be  reconciled. 
But  when  the  Parliament  attempted  to  exercise  an  Eras- 
tian  supremacy,  and  to  strike  oirt  what  they  believed  to 
have  the  authoritative  sanction  of  the  Word  of  God,  they 
refused  to  yield;  and  in  this  instance  their  firmness  and 
energy  were  crowned  with  success.  It  v/as,  no  doubt,  in 
the  power  of  the  Parliament  to  refuse  to  sanction  the  Di- 
rectory of  Ordination  ;  but  it  was  also  in  the  power  of  the 
Assembly  and  the  city  ministers  to  refuse  to  ordain  on 
Erastian  principles  :  and  the  Parliament,  aware  that  they 
could  not,  even  plausibly,  attempt  to  compel  ministers  to 
ordain,  yielded  the  point,  and  reserved  their  Erastianism 
for  the  still  undecided  subject  of  Church  censures. 

The  leading  propositions  respecting  Church  government 
having  been  nearly  completed,  several  members  of  both 
Houses  of  Parliament  attended  the  Assembly,  7th  Novem- 
ber, 1614,  and  required  them  to  hasten  a  report  of  what 
had  been  done  "  concerning  the  government  of  the  Church  ; 
and  the  rather,  because  they"  (Parliament)  "  had  been  soli- 
cited by  the  Committee  of  the  State  of  Scotland  for  it."* 
Dr.  Burgess  and  a  select  committee  were  directed  to  pre- 
pare all  that  had  been  voted  by  the  Assembly,  that  it  might 
belaid  before  Parliament  in  proper  form  wath  all  convenient 
speed.  This  was  done,  read  over  in  the  Assembly,  com- 
pared with  the  papers  in  the  hands  of  the  scribes,  and  a  com- 
mittee named  to  lay  the  whole  before  the  House  of  Com- 
mons on  the  15th  of  November.  The  account  of  what  took 
place  in  the  House  of  Commons,  upon  the  presenting  of 
this  paper,  is  both  curious  and  instructive,  as  an  exhiL'ition 
of  political  management.  "The  Assembly  of  Divines,  as 
soon  as  the  House  of  Commons  were  sate,  and  before  they 
were  full,  came  to  the  House  and  presented  them  with  the 
Assembly's  advice  and  opinion, /or  the  Presbyterian  govern- 
ment to  be  settled ;  and  an  expression  was  in  their  advice, 
•  Lightfoot,  p.  323. 
18* 


210  HISTO'.Y    OF    THE 

that  the  Presbyte .ian  gov^ernment  was  jure  divino  Glyn 
and  Whitelocke  were  tiien  m  the  House,  and  few  others 
but  those  who  concurred  in  judgment  with  the  Assembly, 
and  had  notice  to  be  there  early,  thinking  to  pass  this  bu- 
siness before  the  House  should  be  full.  Glyn  stood  up  and 
spoke  an  hour  to  the  point  o{  jus  divinum  and  tlie  Presby- 
terian government ;  in  which  time  the  House  filled  apace  ; 
and  then  Whitelocke  spoke  to  the  same  points,  enlarging  his 
discourse  to  a  much  longer  time  than  ordinary,  and  pur- 
posely that  the  House  might  be  full — as  it  was  before  he 
had  made  an  end.  And  then  upon  the  question  it  was  car- 
ried, to  lay  aside  the  point  of  jus  divinum  ;  and  herein 
Glyn  and  Whitelocke  had  thanks  from  divers,  for  prevent- 
ing the  surprisal  of  the  House  upon  this  great  question."* 
Such  is  the  account  given  by  Whitelocke,  in  a  tone  of  evi- 
dent self-complacency,  looking  upon  himself  as  having  ma- 
terially aided  in  the  achievement  of  a  meritorious  exploit. 
How  far  we  are  to  believe  his  suggestion  respecting  the 
crafty  design  of  the  Assembly  to  procure  a  ratification  of 
their  opinion  concerning  the  divine  right  of  Presbyterian 
Church  governm.ent  in  a  thinly  attended  House,  composed 
chiefly  of  their  friends,  may  well  be  doubted,  since  the  order 
for  the  Assembly's  committee  to  lay  their  proposition  be- 
fore Parliament  "  to-morrow  morning"  was  publicly  given, 
as  Lightfoot  states — and  of  course  in  the  hearing  of  Light- 
foot  himself,  who  could  easily  have  notified  the  matter  to 
his  Erastian  friends,  so  as  to  prepare  them  for  the  strata- 
gem, had  such  a  thing  been  intended.  In  truth,  the  publi- 
city of  the  direction  renders  the  idea  of  an  intended  stra- 
tao-em  on  the  part  of  the  Assembly  incredible  ;  while 
Whitelock's  account  proves  him  to  have  been  sufficiently 
on  his  guard,  v/hatever  may  have  been  the  case  with 
others.  And  it  will  be  observed,  that  the  House  did  not  at 
that  time  positively  reject,  but  merely  "  lay  aside,"  or  post 
pone,  the  consideration  of  the  claim  of  divine  right.f 

[1645.]  From  about  the  close  of  the  year  IGM  till  about 
April,  1645,  the  Assembly  was  chiefly  engaged  in  the  In- 
dependent controversy,  receiving  the  wa'itten  reasons  of 

*  Whitelocke,  p.  106. 

t  The  account  of  this  matter  given  by  Neal  is  worse  than  inaccurate. 
He  says,  "  When  the  question  was  put  it  was  carried  in  the  negative ;" 
whei  eas  it  was  only  "  laid  aside,"  not  negatived.  Neal  thought  it  a  vi« 
lory  ovei  the  Presbyterians — hence  hif  misrepresentation. 


AVKSTMINSTEH    ASSEMl'.LY.  211 

dissent,  and  returning  written  answers  to  these  reasons. 
During-  tliat  period  the  debates  of  the  Assembly  were  of 
little  importance,  and  the  Erastian  controversy  also  re- 
mained in  compannive  abeyance.  Indeed  the  debates  of 
the  Assembly  may  be  said  to  have  almost  terminated  with 
the  close  of  1644-;  for  their  public  deliberations  after  that 
time  were  chiefly  occupied  with  the  framing  of  the  Cate- 
chisms and  the  Confession  of  Faith  ;  and  although  the  very 
solemn  and  important  nature  of  these  subjects  required 
mature  study  and  great  precision  of  language,  which  form- 
ed necessarily  a  work  of  considerable  time,  yet  there 
existed  so  much  harmony  of  doctrinal  principles  among 
them,  that  their  discussions  very  seldom  assumed  the 
distinctive  character  of  debate.  The  chief  cause,  probably, 
why  the  Erastian  controversy  was  allowed  to  slumber  dur- 
ing that  period,  was  that  the  parliamentary  politicians  were 
engaged  in  the  treaty  of  Uxbridge  with  the  king,  and 
were  exceedingly  anxious  to  conclude  a  peace  with  his 
majesty,  if  possible,  being  apprehensive  that  the  self-deny- 
ing ordinance  would  be  carried  by  the  intrigues  of  Crom- 
well, and  the  sword  be  thereby  wTested  from  their  grasp. 
That  ordinance,  after  a  strugnje  of  nearly  three  months, 
was  at  last  ratified  by  both  Houses,  on  the  3d  of  April, 
164-5,  and  from  that  time  the  army  was  virtually  indepen- 
dent of  the  Parliament,  and  ere  long  became  its  master,  or 
rather  the  tyrant  of  both  Parliament  and  kingdom. 

Mention  has  been  already  made  of  the  disinclination  of 
the  Parliament  to  agree  to  the  Assembly's  proposition 
respecting  the  power  of  ministers  to  keep  back  from  the 
Lord's  table  persons  not  yet  cut  off  from  the  Church.  This 
power  the  Erastians  were  reluctant  to  sanction  ;  and  the 
Assembly  was  equally  urgent  that  it  should  be  fully  sanc- 
tioned, both  because  they  believed  it  to  be  necessary,  to 
prevent  that  sacred  ordinance  from  being  profaned,  and 
because  one  point  strongly  urged  by  the  Independents,  in 
defence  of  their  separation,  was  the  want  of  sufficient 
reformation  in  congregations.  The  subject  was  laid  before 
the  Parliament  on  the  6th  of  March,  1645,  by  the  Assem- 
bly, and  on  the  10th  of  the  same  month  by  the  city  minis- 
ters.* On  the  21st  the  Parliament  took  the  subject  into 
consideration,  and  on  the  25th  some  votes  were  passed 
•    Whitelocke,  pp.  130,  131. 


5il2  HISTORY    OF    THE 

respecting  it,  in  some  particular  points.  Again,  on  tne 
27th,  the  Assembly  gave  to  the  House  their  advice  con- 
cerning not  admitting  scandalous  and  ignorant  persons  to 
the  sacraments.  Thus  urged  to  what  they  had  no  mind  to 
grant,  the  Parliament,  on  the  1st  of  April,  emitted  an  order, 
"That  the  Assembly  set  down  in  particular  what  measure 
of  understanding  persons  ought  to  have  of  the  Trinity, 
and  other  points  debated,  before  they  be  admitted  to  the 
sacrament."*"  The  object  of  this  order  Vv^as  evid  ntly  to 
engage  the  Assembly  in  a  discussion  which  might  occupy 
their  attention  for  a  considerable  time,  and  perhaps  involve 
so  much  confusion  and  disagreement  of  opinion  as  should 
render  a  definite  answer  impracticable.  But  the  desire  of 
the  Assembly  was  not  to  be  so  evaded  ;  and  they  expe- 
rienced less  difficulty  in  answering  the  question  of  the 
Parliament  than  the  Erastian  lawyers  had  expected.  Some 
additional  votes  respecting  Church  government  were  about 
the  same  time  passed  by  the  Parliament,  the  purport  of  which 
is  thus  stated  by  Baillie  : — "  They  have  passed  a  vote  in 
the  House  of  Commons,  for  appeals  from  Sessions  to  Pres- 
byteries, from  these  to  Synods,  from  these  to  national  As- 
semblies, and  from  these  to  the  Parliament.  We  mind  to 
be  silent  for  some  time  on  this,  lest  we  mar  the  erection 
of  the  ecclesiastical  courts  ;  but  when  we  find  it  seasona- 
ble, we  mind  to  make  much  ado  before  it  go  so.  We  are 
hopeful  to  make  them  declare  that  they  mean  no  other 
thing,  by  their  appeals  from  the  national  Assembly  to  a 
Parliament,  than  a  complaint  of  an  injurious  proceeding  ; 
Avhich  we  did  never  deny."  f 

Repeated  debates  took  place  in  Parliament  respecting 
the  demands  of  the  Assembly,  during  the  months  of  May, 
June,  and  July,  though  without  arriving  at  any  conclusion. 
On  the  30th  of  July  Coleman  preached  a  sermon  before 
the  House  of  Commons,  of  the  most  perfect  Erastian  cha- 
racter, to  which  we  shall  have  occasion  hereafter  more 
particularly  to  refer.  On  the  second  day  after,  viz.,  on 
the  1st  of  August,  the  Assembly  sent  a  deputation  to  tlie 
House,  desiring  "that  a  speedy  course  might  betaken 
about  those  who  should  be  thought  not  fit  to  be  admitted 
to  the  sacrament,  namely,  the  ignorant,  scandalous,  and 
profane  :  it  being  a  thing  that,  if  effected  exactly  to  the 
•   Whitelocke,  p.  134.  f  Baillie,  vol.  ii.  p.  267. 


WKSTMI NSTER    A.^SEMF.LY. 


213 


rule,  would  much  tend  to  the  glory  of  God  and  the  gfood 
of  this  whole  kingdom."  The  Speaker  answered,  "  That 
the  House  was  in  debate  of  the  same  business  long  before 
their  coming,  and  that  they  would  expedite  it  with  as  much 
conveniency  as  could  be."*  Not  dismayed  by  this  short 
answer,  the  Assembly,  on  the  8th,  presented  a  petition,  in 
which  they  "  declared  plainly  their  claim,  j?//e  divmo,  o{ 
power  to  suspend  from  the  sacrament  all  such  as  they 
should  judge  to  be  scandalous  or  ignorant  ;"  t  and  on  the 
llth  a  petition  of  a  similar  nature  was  presented  to  the 
House  of  Lords.  Parliament  was  thus  constrained  to  take 
the  subject  into  full  consideration,  for  the  purpose  of  giv- 
ing a  clear  and  decided  deliverance  concerning  it  ;  and  an 
elaborate  discussion  took  place  on  the  3d  of  September, 
in  which  the  Erastians  declared  their  opinions  fully. 

"The  house  fell  into  debate,"  says  Whitelockc,  "of  the 
great  business  of  the  Church,— the  points  of  excommuni- 
cation and  suspension  from  the  sacraments.  Selden  de- 
clared his  opinion,  'That  for  four  thousand  years  there  was 
no  sign  of  any  law  to  suspend  persons  from  religious  exer- 
cises. That  under  the  Law  every  sinner  was,  eo  nomine^ 
to  come  to  ofler,  as  he  was  a  sinner ;  and  no  priest,  or 
other  authority  had  to  do  with  him,  unless  it  might  be 
made  appear  to  them,  whether  another  did  repent  or  not, — 
which  was  hard  to  be  done.  Strangers  were  kept  away 
from  the  passover,  but  these  were  Pagans,  and  such  as  were 
not  of  the  Jewish  religion.  The  question  is  not  now  for 
keeping  away  Pagans  in  tim.es  of  Christianity,  but  Protes- 
tants from  Protestant  worship.  No  divine  can  sho-w  that 
there  is  any  such  command  as  this  to  suspend  from  the 
sacrament.  If,  after  Christ  suffered,  the  Jev>s  had  become 
Christians,  the  same  ground  upon  which  they  went  as  to 
their  sacrifices,  would  have  been  as  to  the  sacrament  ;  and 
certainly  no  way  nor  command"  to  keep  any  one  from  par- 
taking of  it.  No  man  is  kept  from  the  sacrament,  eo  'no- 
mine,  because  he  is  guilty  of  any  sin,  by  the  constitution 
of  the  Reformed  Churches,  or  because  he  hath  not  made 
satisfaction  Every  man  is  a  sinner,  the  difference  is  only, 
the  one  is  in  private,  and  the  other  a  sinner  in  public.  The 
one  is  as  much  against  God  as  the  other.  Die  Ecclesm 
('  Tell  it  to  the  Church'),  in  St.  Matthew,  was,  to  the  courts 
•    Whitclocke,  p.  158.  f  White locke,  p.  160. 


ZXX  r.iSTOllV   OF  THE 

of  law,  which  then  sat  in  Jerusalem.  No  man  can  ^ho\^ 
any  excommunication  till  the  Popes,  Victor  and  Zephori' 
nus,  two  hundred  years  after  Christ,  first  began  to  use  it 
upon  private  quarrels;  thereby  (it  appears)  excommunica- 
tion is  but  human  invention  ;  it  was  taken  from  the 
heathens.'  "* 

Such  was  the  argument  of  "the  learned  Selden  ;"  and 
very  probably  the  members  of  the  House  thought  it  very 
learned,  and  fraught  with  sound  theology.  If  it  had  been 
delivered  in  the  Assembly  it  would  have  been  estimated 
by  a  different  standard,  and  subjected  tc  a  more  searching 
scrutiny, — as  had  been  the  case  with  arguments  and  asser- 
tions of  a  similar  character  in  an  instance  already  related. 

The  substance  of  Mr.  Whitelocke's  speech  was  as  fol- 
lows : — 

"  The  Assembly  of  Divines  have  petitioned  and  advised  the  House  of 
Commons,  that  in  every  Presbytery,  or  Presbyterian  congregation,  tht! 
pastors  and  ruling  elders  may  have  the  power  of  excommunication,  and 
the  power  of  suspending  such  as  they  shall  judge  ignorant  or  scandalous 
persons  from  the  sacrament.  By  |  astors  I  suppose  tlsey  mean  themselves, 
and  others  who  are,  or  may  be  preachers  in  the  several  congregations, 
and  would  be  i-mr^  nrr^i,  bishops,  or  overseers  of  these  congregations. 
By  ruling  elders,  I  take  their  meaning  to  be,  a  select  number  of  such  as 
in  every  one  of  these  congregations  shall  be  chosen  for  the  execution  of 
the  church  government  and  discipline  in  them  respectively.  They  may 
properly  enough  be  called  pastors,  from  our  Saviour's  charge  to  his  dis- 
ciples, '  Feed  my  sheep  ;'  so  that  a  pastor  is  to  feed  those  committed  to 
his  charge  with  spiritual  food,  as  the  shepherd  feeds  his  flock  with  tem- 
poral, if  so,  how  improper,  then,  will  it  be  for  those  who  are  to  feed 
the  flock,  to  desire  the  power  to  excommunicate  any, — to  keep  them 
from  food, — to  suspend  any  from  the  sacrament, — to  drive  them  from 
feeding  on  the  bread  of  life, — to  forbid  any  to  eat  of  that  whereof  Christ, 
the  great  Shepherd  of  our  souls,  hath  said,  '  Take,  eat,' — to  forbid  those 
to  drink  whom  they  shall  judge  unworthy,  when  our  Saviour  himself 
said,  '  Drink  ye  all  of  this.'  In  the  Old  Testament,  '  Ho  !  every  one 
that  thirsteth,'  &c.,  said  the  prophet ;  yet  now  his  successors  would  be 
authorized  to  say  to  some  persons,  *  You  do  not  thirst,'  though  they  them 
selves  say  they  do,  and  to  deny  them  milk  and  water,  bread  and  wine, 
when  they  desire  it.  Surely  it  is  not  proper  for  pastors,  for  feeders 
of  flocks,  to  deny  food  to  any  of  their  flock  who  shall  desire  it. 
But  some  have  said,  that  it  is  the  part  of  a  good  shepherd,  if  he  see 
one  of  his  sheep  going  astray  into  a  ground  where  the  grass  will  bring 
the  rot,  to  chase  him  out  of  that  pasture.  And  they  apply  it  to  spiritual 
pastors,  suspending  those  from  the  sacrament  whom  they  feared,  by  the 
unworthy  receiving  of  it,  may  eat  and  drink  their  own  damnation.  This 
may  be  a  charitable  simile,  but  will  hardly  be  found  a  full  answer ;  for 
•  Whitelocke,  p.  J63  ;  Rushworth,  vol.  vi.  p.  203. 


WESTMLXSTER    ASSEMBLY.  "15 

it  is  not  the  receiving:  of  the  sacrament,  but  the  unwortliinf-ss  of  the 
receiver  that  brings  destruction.  And  whether  he  be  unworthy  or  not, 
it  is  not  in  the  judgment  of  pastor,  or  of  any  other,  but  of  the  party  only 
■lyho  is  the  sinuer ;  for  none  can  know  his  heart  but  himself,  and  a  com- 
mission will  scarce  be  produced  for  any  other  to  be  judge  there(  f.  Tlie 
person  refused  may  say  to  the  pastor  in  this  case,  '  Who  made  thee 
judge  ?'  Besides,  the  authority  desired  is  not  only  oC  suspension,  but  of 
excommunication, — which  is  a  total  driving  or  thundering  away  of  the 
party  from  all  spiritual  food  whatsoever.  And  if  a  shepherd  shall  chase 
away  his  sheep  from  all  pastures,  that  indeed  will  bring  the  hunger-rot 
upoii  them.  The  more  sinful  persons  are,  the  more  they  have  need  of 
instruction  ;  and  where  can  they  have  it  better  than  from  the  lips  of  the 
learned  and  pious  pastors,  who  ought  to  preserve  knowledge. 

"But  it  hath  been  said  that  the  ruling  elders  are  to  join  with  them  ; 
let  us  inquire  who  they  are.  In  some  congregations  in  country  villages, 
perhaps  they  may  not  be  very  learned  themselves  ;  yet  the  autiiority  to 
be  given  them  is  sulficiently  great.  The  word  Elders,  among  the 
Hebrews,"  si2:nified  the  men  of  greatest  power  and  dignity  ;  the  members 
of  their  great  sanhedrim  were  styled  Elders,  so  were  the  princes  of  their 
tribes."^  [Then,  as  if  in  rivalry  "of  Selden,  he  enlarged  upon  the  use  of 
a  similar  title  among  the  Grecians,  the  Phoenicians,  the  Tyrians, 
the.  Romans,  the  Spaniards,  the  Italians,  the  Saxons,— giving  the 
etymology  of  Earl,  Alderman,  and  Sir.]  "  And  so  they  may  allow 
the  title  of  Elders  to  the  chief  and  select  men  of  every  Presbytery. 
Yet  if  this  power  (excommunication  and  suspension)  be  allowed  them, 
they  may  well  challenge  the  title  of  Elders  in  the  highest  signification. 
The  power  of  the  keys  is  a  great  power ;  the  Romish  Church  will 
acknowledge  it,  and  the  foundation  of  their  supremacy  to  be  built  upon 
it.  Whatsoever  they  bind  or  loose  upon  earth  to  be  bound  or  loosed  in 
heaven,  is  a  power  which  may  claim  the  hiiihest  title  imaginable. 
Although  I  can  never  presume  that  the  reverend  and  pious  learned 
gentlemen  who  aim  at  this  power,  can  have  the  least  supposition  of  any 
such  effect  by  it,  yet  if  any  petitioners  should  sue  you  to  be  made  judges 
or  justices,  I  believe  you  would  judge  their  petition  the  less  modest,  and 
them  the  less  fit  for  such  offices;  but  to  this  I  make  no  application,  and 
I  hope  none  shall  make  any  use  of  it.  Power  is  Ihou-ht  fit  to  be  given 
to  suspend  from  the  sacrament  two  sorts  of  persons, — the  ignorant  and 
the  scandalous.  I  am  sure  that  I  am  a  very  ignorant  person;  we  are 
all  more  ignorant  than  we  ought  to  be  of  the  truth  of  Christ ;  CA'en 
amongst  the  pastors  and  elders  in  some  places,  the  most  learned  may  in 
other  places  be  adjudged  ignorant.  The  more  ignorant  people  are,  the 
more  some  will  blame  their  pastors,  who  ought  to  instruct  them,  and,  by 
private  conference,  inform  them,  and  rectify  their  understandings ;  and 
that  is  a  good  part  of  spiritual  food.  And  to  keep  an  ignorant  person 
from  the  ordinances  is  no  way  to  improve  his  knowledge.  Scandalous 
persons  are  likewise  to  be  suspended  ;  and  that  is  to  be  referred  to  the 
judgment  of  the  pastor  and  ruling  elders  ;  where  a  commission  for  them 
to  execute  tliis  judicature  is  extant,  will  be  hard  to  show.  Both  pastors, 
and  elders,  and  people  are  scandalous,  in  the  general  sense.  We  are 
all  of  us  gross  sinners,  and  our  best  performances  are  but  scandalous,  as 
to  the  true  and  sincere  profession  of^  the  Gospel  of  Christ.  Those  who 
are  scandalous  sinners  ought  to  be  admonished  to  forsake  their  evil  ways, 


216  HISTORY  OF  THE 

and  to  amend  their  lives ;  and  where  can  they  receive  this  admonitioUi 
and  hope  for  more  conviction  of  their  consciences,  than  by  hearing  good 
sermons,  and  being  admitted  to  be  partakers  of  the  holy  ordinances  ;  but 
to  excommunicaie  them,  deprives  them  wholly  of  the  best  means  for 
their  cure.  The  best  excommunication  is,  for  pastors,  elders  and  people, 
to  excommunicate  sin  out  of  their  own  hearts  and  conversations, — to 
suspend  themselves  from  all  works  of  iniquity.  This  is  a  power  which, 
put  in  execution,  through  the  assistance  of  the  Spirit  of  God,  will  prevent 
all  disputes  about  excommunication  and  suspension  from  the  sacrament. 
A  man  may  be  a  good  physician,  though  he  never  cut  off  a  member  from 
any  of  his  patients ;  a  body  may  be  very  sound,  though  no  member  of  it 
was  ever  cut  off;  and  surely  a  ch\irch  m.ay  be  a  good  church,  though  no 
member  of  it  hath  ever  been  cut  off.  I  have  heard  here  many  com- 
plaints of  the  jurisdiction  formerly  exercised  by  the  prelates,  who  were 
but  a  few;  there  will  be,  by  the  passing  of  this  now  desired,  a  great  mul- 
tiplication of  spiritual  men  in  government.  Where  the  temporal  sword 
(the  magistracy)  is  sufficient  for  punishment  of  offences,  there  will  be 
little  need  for  this  new  discipline  ;  nor  will  it  be  so  easily  granted," — 
"  After  a  long  debate,"  adds  Whitelocke,  in  the  narrative  part  of  his 
work,  "  tlie  House  referred  this  matter  to  a  further  consideration  by  the 
Grand  Committee,  to  whom  it  was  formerly  referred."* 

From  the  circumstance  of  the  preceding  speech  being 
given  at  full  length  by  both  Whitelocke  and  Kushworth,  it 
is  evident  that  it  must  have  been  regarded  by  the  Erastians 
of  the  Parliament  as  exhibiting  the  ablest  statement  and 
advocacy  of  their  opinions.  One  thing,  indeed,  it  proves 
very  clearly,  namely,  that  when  civilians  attempt  to  reason 
upon  theological  questions,  they  are  in  great  peril  of  for- 
feiting their  reputation  either  for  candor  and  intelligence, 
or  for  clearness  of  thought  and  power  of  reasoning.  It 
will  be  observed  that  Whitelocke  deals  very  much  in  vague 
generalities  about  the  character  and  duties  of  pastors  and 
elders,  and  the  effect  of  suspending  from  the  sacrament 
and  excommunicating ;  and  that  he  insinuates  the  danger 
of  allowing  such  powers  to  be  exercised  by  the  Church 
courts,  but  carefully  avoids  making  any  specific  applica- 
tions. This  method  of  stating  his  opinions  left  him  at  full 
liberty  to  use  all  the  artifices  of  sophistry  which  he  could 
command  ;  and,  accordingly,  his  whole  speech  is  a  tissue 
of  sophistical  plausibilities.  As,  for  example,  "  The  duty 
of  a  pastor  is  to  feed  his  flock  ;  therefore  he  can  have  no 
ri2;ht  to  refuse  food  to  any."  But  he  should  have  proved 
that  the  only  duty  of  a  pastor  is  to  feed;  otherwise  his 
argument  cannot  prove  that  it  may  not  be  also  a  duty  to 
refuse  for  proper  reasons.  Again,  "  The  unworthiness  of 
•Whitelocke,  pp.  163,  164;    Rushworth,  vol.  vi.  pp.  203-205. 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBLY.  217 

the  receiver  alone  brings  destruction  ;  but  none  can  judge 
of  this  but  the  sinner  himself ;  therefore  the  pastor  ought 
not  to  have  power  to  refuse."  True,  the  unworthiness  of 
the  receiver  brings  destruction ;  but  it  is  not  true  that 
none  can  be  a  judge  of  this  but  the  sinner  ;  for  his  con- 
duct may  be  so  glaringly  sinful,  and  he  may  be  so  reck- 
lessly impenitent,  that  every  one  may  be  able  to  judge  him 
by  his  fruits,  and  may  be  constrained  to  shun  him  as  in- 
corrigibly wicked  and  impious.  Once  more,  "  All  are  io-no- 
rant  and  scandalous  in  the  widest  sense  of  these  terms  ; 
but  the  best  way  to  remedy  this  is,  to  give  them  an  oppor- 
tunity of  hearing  good  sermons,  and  to  admit  them  to  the 
holy  ordinances."  Certainly  it  may  be  a  good  way  for 
instructing  the  ignorant,  to  bring  such  persons  where  they 
will  hear  good  and  sound  instruction,  and  the  Westminster 
divines  never  dreamt  of  preventing  any  from  hearing  ser- 
mons; but  admission  to  ordinances,  that  is,  to  the  Lord's 
table,  is  a  totally  different  matter,  and  instead  of  tending 
to  instruct,  might  more  probably  tend  to  harden  an  im- 
penitent sinner,  and  might  lead  him  to  regard  himself  as 
needing  no  further  amendment. 

But  it  cannot  be  necessary  to  detect  all  the  fallacies  of 
this  much  boasted  speech  ;  that  every  sound  and  right- 
minded  reader  will  do  for  himself.  It  has  been  inserted, 
liowever,  for  the  purpose  of  giving  a  favorable  specimen  of 
the  kind  of  arguments  employed  by  the  Parliamentary 
Erastians  of  that  period  ;  which  are  essentially  the  same  as 
those  used  by  many  Erastians  in  the  present  day,  with, 
perhaps,  this  exception,  that  few  modern  Erastians  can 
reason  even  so  well,  or  have  skill  enough  to  enter  so  deeply 
into  the  subject. 

The  language  of  Baillie,  in  a  letter  written  at  this  junc- 
ture, shows  the  strong  anxiety  entertained  by  the  Assem- 
bly regarding  this  important  subject,  and  gives  also  ano- 
ther proof  of  the  temperate  spirit  and  calm  prudence  of 
the  Scottish  commissioners.  After  mentioning  the  diffi- 
culty which  the  Assembly  felt  in  enumerating  all  kinds  of 
scandalous  offences,  on  which  account  they  required  to 
have  power  to  exclude  all  scandalous  as  well  as  some,  he 
adds,  "  The  general  they  would  not  grant,  as  including  an 
arbitrary  and  unlimited  power.  Our  advice  (that  of  the 
Scottish  commissioners)  was,  that  they  (the  Assembly) 
19 


218  HISTORY  OF  THE 

would  go  on  to  set  up  their  Presbyteries  and  Synods  with 
so  much  power  as  they  could  get  j  and  after  they  were 
once  settled,  then  they  might  strive  to  obtain  their  full 
due  power.  But  the  Assembly  was  of  another  mind  ;  and 
after  divers  fair  papers,  at  last  they  framed  a  most  zealous, 
clear,  and  peremptor  one,  wherein  they  held  out  plainly 
the  Church's  divine  right  to  keep  from  the  sacrament  all 
who  are  scandalous  ;  and  if  they  cannot  obtain  the  free 
exercise  of  that  power  which  Christ  hath  given  them,  they 
will  lay  down  their  charges,  and  rather  choose  all  afflic- 
tions than  to  sin  by  profaning  the  holy  table."*  It  was 
the  presenting  of  this  paper  which  gave  occasion  to  the 
preceding  speeches  of  Selden  and  Whitelocke.  And, 
although  the  Parliament  was  determined  not  to  grant  the 
full  claim  of  the  Assembly,  yet  they  were  not  prepared  at 
once  to  declare  that  determination,  but  still  continued  to 
keep  the  subject  in  a  state  of  suspense,  hoping,  probably, 
that  the  divines  would  at  last  consent  to  accept  some  lower 
measure.  While  Parliament  treated  the  Assembly  with  a 
considerable  degree  of  guarded  respect,  they  showed  their 
temper  more  plainly  to  the  city  divines,  a  petition  from 
whom,  "  for  establishing  Presbytery,  as  the  discipline  of 
Jesus  Christ,  they  voted  to  be  scandalous."!  it  might 
have  puzzled  these  sage  senators  to  have  defined  their 
own  language,  and  showed  in  what  respect  such  a  petition 
was  scandalous  ;  but  it  was  easy  for  them  to  apply  harsh 
and  ungracious  epithets  to  a  request  which  they  were  de- 
termined to  refuse. 

it  has  been  already  mentioned  that  the  Parliament  had 
required  the  Assembly  to  state  "  what  measure  of  under- 
standing persons  ought  to  have  of  the  Trinity,  and  other 
points  debated,  before  they  be  admitted  to  the  sacrament ;" 
and  also,  that  they  required  an  enumeration  of  such  scan- 
dalous offences  as  deserved  the  censure  of  suspension  from 
ordinances.  To  the  former  point  the  Assembly  readily 
prepared  an  answer  ;  but  they  found  the  latter  more  diffi- 
cult, both  because  the  attempt  to  enumerate  such  offences 
suggested  additional  ones,  and  because  the  inevitable  ten- 
dency of  such  an  attempt  was  to  present  their  wliole  sys 
tern  in  its  most  repulsive  aspect,  and  even  to  prevent  them- 
selves from  having  a  discretionary  power  to  mitigate  its 
•  Baillie,  vol.  iii.  p.  307.  f  Whitelocke,  f.  159. 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBLY.  219 

apparent  severity.  At  length,  liowcver,  on  tlie  14th  of  Oc- 
tober, the  Assembly  presented  their  advice  on  these  points 
to  the  Parliament,  at  the  same  time  clearly  declaring  their 
earnest  desire  that  the  general  principle  should  be  atlirmed, 
and  the  details  left  to  be  regulated  according  to  the  pecu- 
liarities of  each  specific  case.*  But  the  Parliament  resolved 
to  turn  this  paper  of  advice  into  an  ordinance  of  both 
Houses ;  and  on  the  15th  voted,  as  a  preliminary  step, 
"  That  the  presbytery  should  not  suspend  from  the  sacra- 
ment, for  any  other  offences  than  those  particularly  men- 
tioned in  the  ordinance,"  which,  adds  Whitelocke,  dis- 
pleased some  who  were  earnest  to  give  an  arbitrary  power 
to  the  Presbytery. t  Strange  that  this  legislator  could  not 
perceive,  that  Parliament  was  retaining  a  much  more  arbi- 
trary power  in  its  own  possession, — a  power  which  is  abso- 
lute despotism,  claiming  to  rule  alike  over  person,  property, 
and  conscience. 

On  the  20th  of  October,  1645,  this  important  document 
passed  both  Houses,  under  the  designation  of  ''  An  Ordi- 
nance of  the  Lords  and  Commons  assembled  in  Parliament, 
about  Suspension  from  the  Lord's  Supper."  J  The  state- 
ment of  the  amount  of  religious  knowledge,  which  ought 
to  be  possessed  by  every  person  before  being  admitted  to 
the  Lord's  table,  is  ver}'^  clear  and  explicit  ;  and  the  enu- 
meration of  scandalous  offences  is  also  very  full.  But  in 
one  clause  towards  the  close  of  the  ordinance,  the  Erastian 
principle  is  very  strongly  stated  :  "  If  any  person  suspended 
from  the  Lord's  Supper  shall  find  himself  grieved  with  the 
proceedings  before  the  eldership  of  any  congregation,  he 
shall  have  liberty  to  appeal  to  the  classical  eldership  (or 
Presbytery),  and  from  them  to  the  Provincial  Assembly  (or 
Synod),  from  thence  to  the  National,  and  from  thence  to 
the  Parliament.  And  it  is  further  ordained.  That  the  mem 
hers  of  both  Houses,  that  now  are  members  of  th§.  Assem- 
bly of  Divines,  or  any  seven  of  them,  be  a  standing  coin- 
mittee  of  both  Houses  of  Parliament  to  consider  of  causes 
of  suspension  from  the  Lord's  Supper  not  contained  in 
this  ordinance  ;  unto  which  committee  any  eldership  shall 
present  such  causes,  to  the  end  that  the  Parliament,  if  need 
require,  may  hear  and  determine    the   same."     The  undis- 

•  Baillie,  vol.  ii.  p.  325.  f  Whitelocke,  p.  162. 

X  Rushwortli,  vol.  vi.  pp.  210-212.    Itiee  Appendix. 


220  HISTORY    OF    THE 

guised  Erastianism  of  this  ordinance  was  exceedingly  dis 
pleasing  to  the  Assembly,  and  rendered  them  unwiRing  to 
pnt  it  into  operation  at  all,  even  so  far  as  it  went,  lest  they 
siiould  seem  to  consent  to  a  principle  which  they  so  decid- 
edly condemned.  "  This,"  says  Baillie,  "  has  been  the 
only  impediment  why  the  Presbyteries  and  Synods  have 
not  been  erected  ;  for  the  ministers  refuse  to  accept  of 
Presbyteries  without  this  power."  Both  parties,  indeed, 
were  equally  resolute, — the  Parliament  not  to  grant,  and 
the  Assembly  not  to  be  satisfied  without  the  recognition 
of  what  they  regarded  as  of  divine  right, — a  full  liberty  to 
keep  from  the  holy  table  all  scandalous  persons.  And 
although  the  divines  were  perfectly  able  to  refute  the 
sophistry  of  the  Erastian  lawyers  in  argument,  they  could 
not  change  their  hearts,  nor  make  them  willing  to  submit 
to  the  purifying,  though  humbling  precepts  of  the  Gospel  ; 
consequently  these  unhappy  men  continued  tenaciously  to 
ietain  a  power  which  they  could  not  hold  and  exercise,  but 
t'>  the  injury  of  religion,  and  to  the  ruin  of  themselves  and 
of  the  kingdom. 

Not  only  was  the  Assembly  dissatisfied  with  the  conduct 
of  Parliament  in  thus  attempting  to  retain  an  Erastian 
power  in  ecclesiastical  affairs,  but  all  the  Presbyterians, 
both  ministers  and  people  throughout  the  kingdom,  and 
particularly  those  of  the  city  of  London  itself,  were  both 
grieved  and  displeased  with  conduct  so  graspinaf  and  un- 
wise. A  petition  was  addressed  to  Parliament  from  the 
Common  Council  of  London  praying  that  Church  govern- 
ment might  be  speedily  settled  and  observed,  and  that 
greater  power  might  be  given  to  the  ministers  and  elders 
than  was  established  by  the  Parliament,  according  to  the 
warrant  of  the  Word  of  God.  The  House  answered, 
"  That  they  had  already  taken  much  pains  in  debating  of 
Church  government ;  and  they  conceived  the  city"  and 
Common  Council  were  informed  falsely  of  the  proceedmgs 
of  the  House  else  they  would  not  have  precipitated  the 
judgment  of  the  Parliament  ;  however,  they  take  it  as  a 
good  intention  of  the  petitioners  promoting  this  business." 
A  similar  petition  from  the  city  ministers  received  a  still 
11  ore  uncourteous  answer, — two  of  the  members  were  sent 
to  tell  them,  that,  "  they  need  not  attend  any  longer  for  an 
answer  to  their  petition,  but  to  go  home,  and   look  to  the 


WRSTMI.NSTl.il    .ASSKMf.l.V.  221 

These  ungra- 
cious answers  gave  rise  to  a  feeling  of  alienation  between 
the  city  and  the  Parliament,  the  completed  effect  of  which 
was,  that  counterpoise,  or  rather  paralysis  of  each  other's 
energies,  which  laid  both  prostrate  beneath  the  power  of 
the  army,  by  whom  the  Parliament  was  at  last  trampled  out 
of  existence, — so  swift  and  sure  was  the  blow  of  retribu- 
tive justice.  Had  Parliament  abandoned  its  Erastian  prin- 
ciples, and  granted  the  petitions  of  the  Assembly,  the  min- 
isters, and  the  people,  it  w^ould  have  been  so  deeply  rooted 
in  the  grateful  ailbction  of  the  kingdom,  and  its  power 
would  have  been  so  thoroughly  consolidated,  that  not  even 
Cromwell's  deep  schemes,  and  iron  strength,  could  have 
greatly  sliaken,  much  less  utterly  overthrown  it.  But  it 
sinned  obstin-jtely  aoainst  the  "Prince  of  the  kings  of  the 
earth  ;"  ^ind  therefore  He  dashed   it  to  pieces. 

One  very  probable  reason  vrhy  the  Parliament  were  at 
this  time  assuming  a  more  haughty  tone  than  formerly  was, 
the  depression  of  the  king's  power,  who  had  never  been  able 
to  make  head  against  the  army  to  any  considerable  extent 
since  the  battle  of  Naseby,  on  the  14^th  of  June.  Yet  even  in 
this  point  of  view  the  conduct  of  the  Parliament  was  mark- 
ed by  something  little  short  of  infatuation  ;  for  the  powder 
of  the  army  had  passed  completely  into  the  hands  of  Crom- 
well, though  Fairfax  stiJ  held,  nominally,  the  chief  com- 
mand ;  and  a  very  moderate  degree  of  penetration  micfht 
have  enabled  them  to  perceive  that  they  had  no  means  of 
counterbalancing  the  power  of  the  army  except  by  the 
wealth  and  influence  of  the  city  of  London,  which  was 
thoroughly  Presbyterian.  The  Independents  in  both  Par- 
liament and  the  Assembly  were  delighted  with  the  delay 
caused  by  the  Ernstian  obstinacy  ;  and  to  these  two  par- 
ties. Independents  and  Erastians,  there  was  added,  as  Bail- 
lie  says,  "a  third  party  of  worldly  profane  men,  who  were 
extremely  affrighted  to  come  under  the  yoke  of  ecclesias- 
1  ic  discipline."  The  very  fact  of  such  a  combination 
against  the  Presbyterian  system  would  go  far  to  prove  its 
truth  and  scriptural  character  ;  for  that  can  scarcely  be 
other  than  a  good  cause,  which  provokes  the  opposition  of 
such  conflicting  elements,  and  some  of  them  elements 
essentially  evil. 

*  Whitelocke,  p.  187. 
J9* 


222  HISTORY    OF    THE 

[164-6.]  Though  hitherto  disappointed,  the  Assembly 
nnd  the  city  continued  to  exert  themselves  by  plying  the 
Parliament  with  petition  upon  petition  ;  and  to  one  of 
these,  signed  by  the  whole  magistracy  of  London,  address- 
ed to  both  Houses,  15th  January,  le^iG,  the  Parliament  felt 
it  necessary  to  return  a  courteous  and  complimentary  an- 
swer, thanking  them  for  their  care  and  zeal  for  God's 
worship,  and  assuring  them  of  their  readiness  to  promote 
so  good  a  work.*  Adverting  to  this  petition,  Baillie  says, 
''  No  doubt,  if  they  be  constant  they  will  obtain  all  their 
desires;  for  all  know  that  the  Parliament  here  cannot  sub- 
sist without  London,  so  that  whatsoever  they  desire  in 
earnest  and  constantly,  it  must  be  granted."  On  the  20th 
of  February  it  was  "  Resolved  by  the  Lords  and  Commons 
in  Parliament  assembled,  That  there  be  forthwith  a  choice 
made  of  elders  throughout  the  kingdom  of  England,  ac- 
cording to  such  directions  as  have  already  passed  both 
Houses,  bearing  date  the  19th  of  August,  1645."  But  on 
the  14th  of  March,  a  more  complete  ordinance  passed  both 
Houses,  containing  full  regulations  respecting  the  choice 
of  elders  and  of  everything  necessary  for  the  organization 
'■)(  the  Presbyterian  form  of  Church  government.  Even 
in  this  ordinance  the  same  Erastian  element  appeared. 
By  one  clause  it  was  enacted,  "  That  in  every  province 
persons  shall  be  chosen  by  the  Hoases  of  Parliament,  that 
shall  be  commissioners  to  judge  of  scandalous  offences, 
not  enumerated  in  any  ordinance  of  Parliament,  to  them 
presented  ;"  and  upon  the  decision  of  these  commission- 
ers it  was  to  depend  whether  the  eldership  might  suspend 
persons  accused  of  such  offences  from  the  sacrament. f 

Before  this  ordinance  had  passed  the  Lords,  and  as  soon 
as  its  tenor  was  known  from  the  deliberations  of  the  Com- 
mons, both  the  Assembly  and  the  city  ministers  prepared 
to  give  the  most  decided  opposition  to  this  Erastian 
clause.  "  I  wish,"  says  Baillie,  writing  to  one  of  the  citj 
ministers,  "  by  all  means  that  unhappy  court  of  commis- 
sioners in  every  shire  may  be  exploded.  If  it  must  be  so, 
let  the  new  cases  of  scandal  come  to  the  Parliament  bj'- 
the  letters  of  the  eldership,  or  any  other  way,  but  not  by  a 
standing  court   of  commissioners.     This   is  a  trick  of  the 

•  Whitelocke,  p.  194. 

t  Kushworth,  vol.  vi.  pp.  224-228.     See  Appendix. 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBLY.  223 

Independents'  invention,  of  purpose  to  enervate  and  dis- 
grace all  our  government,  in  wh'ich  they  have  been  assist- 
ed by  the  lawyers  and  the  Erastian  party.  This  troubles 
us  all  exceedingly;  the  whole  Assembly  and  ministry  over 
the  kintrdom  ;  the  body  of  the  city  is  much  grieved  with 
it;  but  how  to  mend  it  we  cannot  well  tell.  In  the  mean 
time  it  mars  us  to  set  up  anything  ;  the  anarchy  continues, 
and  the  vilest  sects  daily  increase."  Such,  indeed,  was 
the  inevitable  consequence  of  allowing  the  kingdom  to 
continue  without  any  regular  form  of  Church  government 
and  discipline,  the  presence  of  which  acts  by  a  moral  con- 
straint on  even  those  who  do  not  admit  its  authority,  as 
the  experience  of  all  ages  and  countries  can  amply  testify. 
Fully  aware  of  the  extreme  importance  of  obtaining  a 
right  adjustment  of  this  essential  point,  the  Presbyterians 
both  of  Scotland  and  England  made  every  possible  exer- 
tion to  secure  it.  And  there  seemed  to  be  one  favorable 
opportunity,  by  availing  themselves  of  which  it  might  yet 
be  accomplished.  The  unhappy  king,  beaten  from  the  field 
by  successive  and  ruinous  defeats,  had  retired  to  Oxford, 
where  he  found  himself  almost  driven  to  distraction  by  the 
wretched  cabals  of  his  selfish  and  unprincipled  adherents. 
In  these  circumstances  he  proposed  a  new  negotiation  for 
peace,  and  many  letters  were  interchanged  between  him 
and  the  Parliament  on  this  subject.  But  the  Parliament 
were  now  not  only  secure  of  triumph,  but  also  under  the 
infl'.ience  of  Cromwell  and  his  friends,  who  had  no  wish  for 
pe3ce  ;  and  for  these  reasons  they  rose  in  their  demands 
to  such  a  degree,  that  all  prospects  of  peace  were  greatly 
obscured.  The  Scottish  parliamentary  commissioners,  on 
the  other  hand,  were  desirous  of  peace  on  such  terms  as 
should  not  annihilate  the  regal  dignity,  and  therefore  they 
endeavored  so  far  to  modify  the  demands  of  the  English 
Parliament,  that  they  might  be  such  as  the  king  could  ho 
norably  grant.  But  the  iEnglish  Parliament  felt  that  they 
had  no  longer  any  urgent  need  of  assistance  from  a  Scot 
tish  army,  and  therefore  were  not  inclined  to  listen  to  the 
more  reasonable  proposals  of  the  Scottish  commissioners. 
Still,  they  could  not  at  once  dishonorably  violate  their 
Solemn  League  and  Covenant  with  Scotland,  and  therefore 
they  continued  to  receive,  with  due  respect,  the  communi- 
cations of  the  Scottish  Parliament  through  its  commission- 


224  HISTORY    OF    THE 

ers.  And  as  these  commissioners  were  all  Presbyterians, 
they  felt  deeply  interested  in  the  question  of  the  right 
establishment  of  Presbyterian  Church  government  in  Eng- 
land, according  to  the  principles  of  the  Solemn  League  of 
both  nations.  For  this  reason  they  presented  to  the  English 
Parliament  several  papers  respecting  the  pending  treaty  of 
peace,  and  the  various  matters  involved  in  it  ;  one  of  which 
necessarily  was,  the  form  of  religion  to  be  established,  to 
which  the  king  was  to  be  requested  to  give  his  concur- 
rence. On  the  subject  of  religion  these  papers  took  up 
the  points  that  had  so  much  engaged  the  attention  of  the 
Assembly,  and  gave  their  opinion  in  the  following  man- 
ner : — 

"  Having  perused  the  several  ordinances,  directions,  and  votes  of  the 
honorable  Houses  concerning  Church  government  delivered  unto  us, 
which  we  conceive  will  be  the  matter  of  the  propositions  of  religion,  and 
in  this  sense  only  we  speak  to  them,  we  do  agree  to  the  direction  for  the 
present  election  of  elders,  to  the  subordination  of  congregational,  class- 
ical, provincial,  and  national  assemblies,  and  to  the  direction  concerning 
the  members  of  which  they  are  constitute,  and  the  times  of  their  meet- 
ing. Only  we  desire,  that  no  godly  minister  be  excluded  from  being  a 
member  of  the  classical  presbytery  ;  nor  any  godly  minister  having  law- 
ful commission  from  being  a  member  of  the  provincial  and  national  As- 
semblies, there  being  the  greater  need  of  their  presence  and  assistance 
in  such  Assemblies,  that  there  are  no  ruling  elders  to  join  with  and 
assist  them.  And  we  desire  that  a  fixed  time  be  appointed  for  the  ordi- 
nary meeting  of  the  national  Assembly,  with  power  to  the  Parliament 
to  summon  them  when  they  please ;  and  with  liberty  to  the  Church  to 
meet  oftener,  if  there  shall  be  necessary  cause;  the  ordinary  meeting 
thereof  being  most  necessary  for  preserving  truth  and  unity  in  the  whole 
Church,  against  the  errors  that  may  arise  and  multiply  in  the  Church, 
and  against  the  divisions  and  differences  that  may  distract  the  inferior 
assemblies  of  the  Church,  and  for  receiving  and  determining  ai)peals 
from  provincial  assemblies,  which  otherwise  will  be  infinite,  and  lie  over 
long  without  determination,  and  the  exigence  of  religion  sometimes  being 
such  that  it  will  require  an  extraordinary  meeting. 

"  We  agree  to  the  rules  and  directions  concerning  suspension  from  the 
sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  in  cases  of  ignorance  and  scandal.  Only 
we  desire  that  the  congregational  eldership  may  have  power  to  judge  in 
cases  of  scandal  not  enumerated,  with  liberty  to  the  person  grieved  to 
appeal,  as  in  other  Reformed  Churches.  This  we  conceive  to  be  a 
power  no  more  arbitrary  in  this  Church,  than  in  them  who  are  limited 
by  the  rules  expressed  in  Scripture,  and  do  exercise  this  their  power  with 
such  moderation  as  is  a  comfort,  help,  and  strengthening  of  civil  author- 
ity. The  appointing  of  provincial  commissioners,  such  as  are  appointed 
in  the  ordinance,  will  minister  occasion  to  such  debates  and  disputes,  in 
this  and  other  Churches,  as  will  be  very  unpleasant  to  Parliaments  and 
civil   powers,  will  make  a   great  disconformity  betwixt  this  and  othet 


WESTMINSTER  ASSEMBLY. 


225 


Churches,  and  a  present  rent  ami  division  in  this  Church  ;  is  such  a 
mixture  ia  Church  government  as  hath  not  been  heard  of  in  any  Church 
hcfore  this  time,  and  may  prove  a  foundation  of  a  new  Episcopacy,  or 
of  a  High  Commission.  And  the  work  may  be  better  done  by  the  As- 
semblies of  ministers  and  elders  who  have  this  in  their  ecclesiastical 
charge,  and  will  be  no  less  tender  of  the  honor  of  Parliament,  by  whose 
laws  they  live  and  are  protected  ;  and  as  able  and  willing  to  give  satis- 
faction to  the  people,  whose  consciences  and  conversation  are  best 
known  unto  them,  as  any  other  persons  whatsoever.  Concerning  the 
suspension  of  the  ministers  themselves,  although  scandal  in  them  de- 
serveth  double  censure,  yet  we  conceive  it  to  be  most  agreeable  that  they 
have  their  censure  from  the  classical,  or  other  superior  Assemblies  of  the 
Church,  where  there  be  ministers  to  judge  them.  We  do  also  agree  to 
the  ordinance  of  ordination  of  ministers;  only  we  desire  it  may  be  pro- 
vided,  that  it  stand  in  force  for  all  time  to  come. 

«'  'IMiere  be  other  matters  contained  in  the  ordinances;  as.  The  man 
ner  of  subordination  of  the  Assemblies  of  the  Church  to  the  Parliament, 
so  much  liable  to  mistake.  The  seeming  exemption  of  some  soits  of 
persons  from  the  just  censures  of  the  Church  :  the  ministering  the  sacra- 
ment to  some  persons  against  the  consciences  of  the  ministry  and  elder- 
ship :  concerning  public  repentance  to  be  only  before  the  elderships,  and 
such  like ;  which  may  be  taken  into  consideration,  and  with  small 
labor  and  alteration  be  determined  to  the  great  satisfaction  of  many.  As 
for  the  remnant  concerning  the  perpetual  officers  of  the  Church,  and 
their  offices  ;  the  order  and  power  of  Church  Assembliei^,  the  order  of 
public  repentance,  and  of  proceeding  to  excommunication  and  absolu- 
tion ;  we  desire  they  may  be  agreed  u|)on  according  to  the  cov.  nant,  and 
the  advice  of  the  divines  of  both  kin,'doms,  long  since  ottered  to  both 
Houses;  which  bf  ing  done,  they  may  be  presently  drawn  in  a  method, 
and  formed  up  in  a  model  of  Church  government  in  three  days,  to  the 
quieting  the  minds  of  all  the  godly,  concerning  the  particular  meaning 
of  both  kingdoms  in  the  matter  of  religion,  to  the  great  content  of  the 
Reformed  Churches,  and  which  will  both  make  us  distinctly  to  know 
what  we  demand,  and  the  king  what  he  doth  grant."* 

Within  a  few  days  after  these  papers  had  been  laid  be- 
fore the  English  Parliament,  and  before  the  two  Houses 
had  returned  any  answer,  they  were  printed  and  published 
with  a  preface,  as  from  a  private  person  into  whose  hands 
they  had  fallen  by  accident,  purporting  to  state  the  case 
between  the  Parliament  and  the  Scottish  commissioners.! 
Both  Houses  Avere  exceedingly  indignant  that  such  liberty 
should  be  taken  with  their  proceedings,  and  on  the  14-th  of 
April  concurred  in  a  vote  :  "  That  the  matter  contained  in 
these  printed  papers  was  false,  and  scandalous  against  the 
Parliament  and  kingdom  of  England  ;  that  they  should  be 

•  Rushworth,  vol.  vi.  pp.  254,  255. 

t  Baillie  informs  us  that  David  Buchanan  was  the  person  by  whom 
Ihey  were  published.     Vol  ii.  p.  367. 


226  HISTORY  OF    THE 

burned  by  the  common  hangman  ;  that  a  declaration 
should  be  drawn  up  refuting  their  untruths,  and  showing 
the  innocence  and  integrity  of  the  Parliament  ;  and  that 
the  author  or  publisher  was  an  incendiary  between  the  two 
kingdoms."  And  on  the  21st  of  April  the  preface  was 
burnt  as  had  been  ordered,  but  not  the  papers  of  the  Scot- 
tish commissioners. 

The  Declaration  published  by  the  Parliament  for  their 
own  vindication  was  characterized  by  equal  intemperate 
heat  and  bitterness,  and  contained  a  very  strong  assertion 
of  the  Erustian  theory  ;  colored,  however,  by  the  pretext 
of  their  dread  of  the  consequences  which  might  ensue  from 
"granting  an  arbitrary  and  unlimited  power  and  jurisdic- 
tion to  near  ten  thousand  judicatories  to  be  erected  within 
this  kingdom ;"  and  asserting  that  they  "  had  the  more 
reason  by  no  means  to  part  with  this  power  out  of  the 
hands  of  the  civil  magistrate,  since  the  experience  of  all 
ages  will  manifest  that  the  reformation  and  purity  of  reli- 
gion, and  the  preservation  and  protection  of  the  people  of 
God  in  this  kingdom,  hath  under  God  been  bjr  the  Parlia- 
ments, and  their  exercise  of  this  power."  How  easy  it  is 
to  make  bold  and  general  assertions  ;  but  had  the  English 
Parliament  been  required  to  produce  proofs  and  instances 
in  maintenance  of  their  self-complacent  assertion,  they 
would  have  found  that  they  had  undertaken  no  easy  task. 
And  it  might  have  occurred  to  them,  that  such  vehemence 
of  conduct  and  language  might  be  very  fairly  interpreted 
into  a  proof  that  they  vvere  aware  that  they  had  acted 
wrong,  and  that  their  anger  arose  from  the  painful  and 
mortifying  consciousness  of  being  detected  in  the  commis- 
sion of  what  was  manifestly  culpable.  But  even  yet  an 
English  Parliament  can  reason  and  act  in  a  similar  manner, 
untaught  by  the  bitter  experience  of  their  ancestors,  and 
unable  to  read  the  signs  of  the  times,  however  close  the 
resemblance  which  these  bear  to  a  former  period. 

Not  even  this  manifestation  of  the  Parliament's  stormy 
temper  could  appal  the  Assembly  of  Divines,  although  the 
city  ministers  had  somewhat  quailed.  Mr.  Marshall,  by 
no  means  one  of  the  most  rash  or  impetuous  of  the  brethren, 
arose  in  his  place,  and  after  referring  to  the  recent  ordi- 
nance, and  stating  that  there  were  several  things  in  it  which 
pressed  heavily  upon   his  conscience,  and  upon  the  con* 


Wt.STMINSTEH    ASSEMliLV.  22T 

sciences  of  many  otliers,  he  moved,  that  a  committee  might 
be  appointed  to  examine  what  points  in  the  ordinance  were 
contrary  to  their  consciences,  and  to  prepare  a  petition  on 
the  subject,  to  be  presented  to  the  two  Houses.  This  was 
accordingly  done,  and  presented  by  the  whole  Assembly, 
with  Mr.  Marshall  at  their  head,  on  the  24'th  of  March. 
The  main  topics  of  the  petition  were,  an  assertion  of  the 
divine  right  of  Presbyterian  Church  government,  and  a 
complaint  against  that  clause  in  the  recent  ordinance 
which  appointed  an  appeal  from  the  censures  of  the  Churcli 
to  a  committee  of  the  Parliament.  The  House  appears  to 
have  been  somewhat  staggered  by  this  decided  course 
adopted  by  the  Assembly,  and  appointed  a  committee  to 
cons^ider  what  answer  should  be  given,  and  what  notice 
should  be  taken  of  the  manner  in  which  the  petition  had 
been  brought  forward.  The  report  of  the  committee  was 
characterized  by  deep  policy.  First,  they  gave  it  as  their 
Oj)inion,  that  the  Assembly  of  Divines  had,  in  their  recent 
petition,  violated  the  privileges  of  Parliament,  and  incurred 
the  penalties  of  a  premunire  ;  and  next,  they  proposed,  that 
since  the  Assembly  insisted  on  the  jus  divinu/n  of  the  Pres- 
byterian government,  certain  queries  which  they  had  pre- 
pared respecting  that  point  might  be  sent  to  the  Assembly, 
and  the  divines  required  to  return  answers  to  the  satisfac- 
tion of  the  Parliament.  The  House  approved  of  the  com- 
mittee's report,  and  on  the  30th  of  April  sent  Sir  John 
Evelyn,  Mr.  Fiennes,  and  Mr.  Brown,  to  state  to  the  As- 
sembly the  sentiments  of  the  House,  and  to  require  an- 
swers to  the  prepared  list  of  interrogations. 

These  questions  display  so  clearly  the  captious  cha- 
racter and  petulant  temper  of  the  Erastians,  even  Avhile 
pretending  to  be  merely  desiring  satisfaction  to  their 
scruples  of  conscience,  that  we  think  it  expedient  to  insert 
them  here : — 

*'  Questions  propounded  to   the  Assembly  of  Divines   by  the  House  of 
Commons,  touching  the    point  of  Jus  Divinum    in  the    matter   of 
Church  government. 
"  Whereas  it  is  resolved  by  both  Houses,  that  all  persons  guilty  of  no- 
torious and   scandalous  offences  shall  be  suspended  from  the  sacrament 
of  the  Lord's  Supper;  the  House  of  Commons  desires  to  be  satisfied  by 
the  Assembly  of  Divines  in  the  questions  following: — 

"  1.  Whether  the  parochial  and  congregational  elderships  appointed 
by  ordir  ance  of  Parliament,  or  any  other  congregational  or  presbyterial 


228  HISTORY  OF  THE 

elderships,  are  jure  divino^  and  by  the  will  and  appointment  of  Jesus 
Christ  ?  And  whether  any  particular  Church  government  be  jure  divi- 
no  ?     And  what  that  government  is  ? 

"2.  Whether  all  the  members  of  the  said  eldership,  as  members  there- 
of, or  which  of  them,  are  jure  divino,  and  by  the  will  and  appointment 
of  Jesus  Christ  ? 

"  3.  Whether  the  superior  assemblies  or  elderships,  viz.,  the  classical, 
provincial,  and  national,  whether  all  or  any  of  them,  and  which  of  them, 
are  jure  divino,  and  by  the  will  and  appointment  of  Jesus  Christ? 

"  4.  Whether  appeals  from  the  congregational  elderships  to  the  clas- 
sical, provincial,  or  national  assemblies,  or  any  of  them,  and  to  which 
(if  them,  nve  jure  divino?  And  are  their  powers  upon  such  appeals  jwre 
dicino,  and  by  the  will  and  appointment  of  Jesus  Christ  ? 

"  5.  Whether  oecumenical  fissemblies  are  jure  divino  ?  And  whether 
there  be  api)eals  from  any  of  the  former  assemblies  to  the  said  oecumeni- 
cal, J7*re  rfivmo,  and  by  the  will  and  appointment  of  Jesus  Christ? 

"  6.  Whether  by  the  Word  of  God  the  power  of  judging  and  declaring 
what  are  such  notorious  and  scandalous  offences,  lor  which  persons 
guilty  thereof  are  to  be  kept  from  the  sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper, — 
and  of  eonvenina;  before  them,  trying,  and  actiially  suspending  from  the 
sacrament  such  offenders  accordins:ly, — is  either  in  the  congregational 
eldership  or  presbytery,  or  in  any  other  eldership,  congregation,  or  per- 
sons ?  And  whether  such  powers  are  in  them  only,  or  in  any  of  them, 
and  in  which  of  them,  jftre  divino,  and  by  the  will  and  appointment  of 
Jesus  Christ  ? 

"  7.  Whether  there  be  any  certain  and  particular  rules  expressed  in 
ihe  Word  of  God,  to  direct  the  elderships  or  presbyteries,  congregations 
or  persons,  or  any  of  them,  in  the  exercise  and  execution  of  the  powers 
aforesaid  ?     And  what  are  those  rules  ? 

"8.  Is  theie  anything  contained  in  the  Word  of  God,  that  the  su- 
preme magistracy  m  a  Christian  State  may  not  judge  and  determine 
what  are  the  aforesaid  notorious  and  scandalous  offences,  and  the  man- 
ner of  suspension  for  the  same  ?  And  in  what  particulars,  concerning 
the  premises,  is  the  said  supreme  magistracy  by  the  Word  of  God 
exjiuded  ? 

"  9.  Whether  the  provision  of  commissioners  to  judge  of  scandals  not 
enumerated  (as  they  are  authorized  by  the  ordinance  of  Parliament)  be 
contrary  to  that  way  of  government  which  Christ  hath  appointed  in  his 
Church  ?     And  wherein  are  they  so  contrary  ? 

'*  In  answer  to  these  particulars  the  House  of  Commons  desires  of 
the  Assembly  of  Divines  their  proofs  from  Scripture,  and  to  set  down  the 
several  texts  of  Scripture  in  the  express  words  of  the  same.  And  it  ia 
ordered,  that  every  particular  minister  of  the  Assembly  of  Divines,  that 
is  or  shall  be  present  at  the  debate  of  any  of  these  questions,  do,  upon 
every  resolution  which  shall  be  piesented  to  this  House  concerning  the 
same,  subscribe  his  respective  name,  either  with  the  affirmative  or  nega- 
tive, as  he  gives  his  vote.*  And  those  that  do  dissent  from  the  major 
part  shall  set  down  their  positive  opinion«,  with  the  express  texts  of 
Scripture  upon  which  their  opinions  are  grounded.f 

•  This  was  evidently  for  the  purpose  of  intimidation. 
t  Rush  worth,  vol.  vi.  pp.  260,  261. 


V  ESTMINSTKR    ASSF.MIil.V  229 

It  is  not  difficult  to  perceive  the  bitter  hostility  against 
every  kind  and  degree  ot  spiritual  jurisdiction  which  per- 
vades these  questions  ;  nor  yet  is  it  difficult  to  detect  the 
sophistical  fallacy  which  forms  the  basis  of  the  whole.  In 
llicse  Erastian  questions  there  is  a  constant  endeavor  to 
keep  a  variety  of  details  prominently  before  the  mind,  so  as 
to  obscure  the  main  principle  as  far  as  possible  ;  and  even 
when  the  proper  question  of  principle  is  slated,  it  is  done 
in  the  same  manner, — "  Whether  any  particular  Church 
government  he  jure  divino  V^  The  very  essence  of  the 
inquiry  is,  "  Whether  there  be  in  the  Word  of  God  Churcli 
government  1"  and  if  that  be  affirmed,  then  the  question 
arises,  "  What  that  government  is  ?"  With  regard  to  all 
matters  of  detail,  on  which  the  parliamentary  Erastians 
loved  to  dilate,  these  would  naturally  arise  either  from 
Scripture  precept  or  Scripture  practice,  applied  as  enlight- 
ened reason  might  dictate  and  emergencies  require.  But 
the  Assembly  was  composed  of  men  well  able  to  detect  the 
sophistry  of  their  opponents,  and  therefore  they  declined 
entering,  in  the  first  place,  into  a  series  of  detailed  Jind 
circumstantial  answers.  But  as  they  had  been  previously 
led  to  investigate  very  fully  the  same  subject,  in  the  course 
of  their  o^vn  deliberations  while  framing  the  Confession  of 
Faith,  they  proceeded  to  state  their  main  proposition  on 
the  subject  of  Church  censures,  on  which,  as  will  be  per- 
ceived, the  whole  Erastian  controversy  turned,  with  the 
intention  of  giving  a  clear  and  explicit  expression  of  their 
judgment  respecting  the  master-principle  and  essence  of 
the  question.  This  they  did  in  the  following  simple  yet 
comprehensive  proposition : — "The  Lord  Jesus,  as  King 
AND  Head  of  his  Church,  hath  therein  appointed  a  gov- 
ernment, IN  the  hand  of  Church  officers,  distinct  from 
the  civil  magistrate." 

The  affirmation  of  this  prop  sition  was  regarded,  both 
by  the  Assembly  and  by  the  Erastian  party,  as  containing 
a  complete  rejection  of  the  Erastian  principle  ;  for,  in  their 
clear  style  of  reasoning,  they  perceived,  that  if  Church 
government  were  admitted  to  be  "  distinct  from  the  civil 
magistrate,"  then  the  civil  magistrate  could  exercise  no 
jurisdiction  in  Church  matters,  as  that  would  be  to  break 
down  the  distinction.  Against  this  proposition,  according- 
ly, the  two  Erastians  in  the  Assembly,  especially  Coleman, 
20 


230  HISTORY   OF  THE 

directed  their  whole  force  of  argument.  Baillie  says,  "  To 
oppose  the  Erastian  heresy,  we  find  it  necessary  to  say, 
that  Christ  in  the  New  Testament  had  instituted  a  Church 
government  distinct  from  the  civil,  to  be  exercised  by  the 
officers  of  the  Church,  without  commission  from  the  magis- 
trate. None  in  the  Assembly  has  any  doubt  of  this  truth, 
but  one  Mr.  Coleman,  a  professed  Erastian  ;  a  man  reason- 
ably learned,  but  stupid  and  inconsiderate,  half  a  pleasant, 
and  of  small  estimation.  But  the  lawyers  in  the  Parliament 
did  blow^  up  the  poor  man  with  much  vanity  ;  so  he  is 
become  their  champion,  to  bring  out,  the  best  way  he  can, 
Erastus'  arguments  against  the  proposi*:ion  We  give  him 
a  fair  and  free  hearing  5  albeit  we  fear,  when  we  have  an- 
swered all  he  can  bring,  and  have  confirmed  with  undenia- 
ble proofs  our  proposition,  the  Houses,  when  it  comes  to 
them,  shall  scrape  it  out  of  the  Confession  ;  for  this  point 
is  their  idol.  The  most  of  them  are  incredibly  zealous 
for  it.  The  pope  and  the  king  were  never  more  earnest 
for  the  headship  of  the  Church  than  the  plurality  of  this 
Parliament."* 

After  the  Assembly  had  debated  this  proposition  for 
some  time,  and  w^ere  about  to  put  it  to  the  vote,  Coleman 
w^as  taken  ill,  and  sent  a  request  to  the  Assembly,  that  they 
would  delay  it  for  a  few  days,  as  he  had  still  some  argu- 
ments to  bring  forward.  The  Assembly  complied  ;  but 
after  an  illness  of  four  or  five  days  he  expired,  and  the  pro- 
position was  passed,  with  the  single  dissentient  vote  of 
Li.';htfoot.  In  the  account  of  this  event  contained  in 
'•  Neal's  History  of  the  Puritans,"  the  names  of  those  who 
subscribed  this  proposition,  according  to  the  injunction  of 
the  Parliament,  are  given,  amounting  Xo  fifty-two^  and  com- 
prising all  the  men  of  chief  eminence  in  the  Assembly,  ex- 
clusive of  the  Scottish  divines,  who  spoke,  but  did  not  vote 
on  any  subject.  Neal  contradicts  himself  in  his  account, 
stating,  that  the  Independents  took  -'the  opportunity  to 
withdraw,  refusing  absolutely  to  be  concerned  in  the 
affair  5"  f  yet  in  the  list  w^hich  he  gives,  there  are  the 
names  of  Goodwin,  Nye,  Greenhill,  and  Carter,  all  of  them 
Independents, — the  names  of  Burroughs,  Bridge,  and  Simp- 
son only  being  wanting  to  complete  the  w^hole  of  that  party 
who  signed  the  Reasons  of  Dissent,  of  which  mention  has 
•  Baillie,  vol.  ii.  p.  360.  f  Neal,  vol.  ii.  p.  395. 


WF.STMINSTI-R   ASSE^IP.LY.  231 

been  already  made  Indeed,  the  whole  of  Neal's  statement 
respectin^r  the  conduct  of  the  Presbyterians  is  so  warped 
and  biased  by  prejudice,  that  it  presents  a  very  unfair  view 
not  only  of  their  characters,  but  even  of  the  facts  that  oc- 
curred in  which  they  bore  a  leading  part. 

But  the  Assembly  were  not  contented  with  thus  cutting 
the  heart  out  of  the  Erastian  theory ;  they  appointed  a 
committee  to  prepare  answers  to  the  Parliaments  ques- 
tions, following  out  the  principle  of  their  own  fundamental 
proposition.  "The  work  of  the  Assembly,"  says  Baillie, 
"  these  bygone  weeks  has  been  to  answer  some  very  cap- 
tious questions  of  the  Parliament,  about  the  clear  scriptural 
warrant  for  all  the  punctilios  of  the  government.  It  was 
thought  it  would  be  impossible  for  us  to  answer,  and  that 
in  our  answers  there  v\Ould  be  no  unanimity ;  yet,  by  God's 
grace,  we  shall  deceive  them  who  were  waiting  for  our 
halting.  The  committee  has  prepared  very  solid  and  satis- 
factory answers  already  to  almost  all  the  questions,  wherein 
there  is  like  to  be  an  unanimity  absolute  in  all  things  mate- 
rial, even  with  the  Independents.  But  because  of  the  Assem- 
bly's way,  and  the  Independents'  miserable,  unnmendable 
design  to  keep  all  things  from  any  conclusion,  it's  like  we 
shall  not  be  able  to  perfect  our  answers  for  some  time  ; 
therefore  I  have  put  some  of  my  good  friends,  leading- 
men  in  the  House  of  Commons,  to  move  the  Assembly  to 
lay  aside  our  questions  for  a  time,  and  labor  that  which  is 
most  necessary,  and  all  are  crying  for, — the  perfecting  of 
the  Confession  of  Faith  and  Catechism."  *  The  House  of 
Commons  followed  the  suggestion  here  alluded  to,  which 
was  made  about  the  middle  of  July  ;  and  as  the  course  of 
events  rolled  on,  and  matters  of  great  importance  occu- 
pied the  attention  of  the  Parliament,  little  more  inquiry 
was  made  by  the  House  respecting  the  Assembly's  answers 
to  their  questions. 

Although  the  answers  of  the  Assembly  to  these  Eras- 
tian  questions  were  not  finally  called  for  and  printed  by 
the  Parliament,  there  is  some  reason  to  believe  that  their 
labor  was  not  wholly  lost  to  the  public.  For  after  the 
change  of  affairs  which  induced  the  Parliament  to  change 

*  Baillie,  vol.  ii.  p.  378. — This  is  a  sufficient  refutation  of  Neal's 
dsseition.  that  the  Assembly  durst  not  present  their  answers  to  Parlia« 
inent  for  fear  of  a  premunire. 


232  HISTORY  OF  THE 

its  course,  several  months  were  allowed  to  pass  away,  lest 
the  Commons  might  repeat  their  demand  ;  but  at  length, 
on  the  1st  of  December,  1646,  a  book  was  published,  en- 
titled, "Jw.9  Divinum  Regiminis  Ecclesiastici  ;  or  The  Divine 
Kig-ht  of  Church  Government  Asserted  and  Evidenced  by 
the  Holy  Scriptures.  By  sundry  Ministers  of  Christ  within 
the  City  of  London."  This  work  is  an  express  and  direct 
answer  to  the  Parliament's  questions  respec;ing  divine 
right,  following  these  questions  in  their  order,  and  giving 
to  them  a  distinct  reply  point  by  point,  confirming  every 
argument  by  Scripture  proofs,  and  by  quotations  from  the 
writings  of  learned  and  able  ecclesiastical  authors.  Judg- 
ino-  from  internal  evidence,  in  matter,  manner,  and  styJe,  it 
appears  almost  certain  that  this  work  at  least  embodies  the 
substance  of  the  answer  prepared  by  the  Assembly,  some- 
what enlarged  and  modified  by  the  city  ministers,  in  wiiose 
name  it  was  published.  This  idea  is  not  set  aside  by  the 
manner  in  which  it  is  noticed  by  Baillie,  who  says,  "  The 
ministers  of  London  have  put  out  this  day  a  very  fine 
book,  proving  from  Scripture  the  divine  right  of  every  part 
of  the  Presbyterial  government."*  We  do  not  mean  to 
assert,  that  the  work  published  by  the  city  ministers  was 
the  identical  production  of  the  Assembly  ;  but  that  so  miich 
of  the  one  was  transfused  into  the  other  as  to  render  them 
to  all  practical  intents  one  work,  and  to  relieve  us  from 
any  cause  to  regret  that  the  Assembly's  answer  was  not 
published.  On  the  seventh  day  after  the  appearance  of 
this  book,  the  House  of  Commons  requested  the  Assembly 
to  give  in  their  answers  to  the  jus  divinum  queries,  as  i( 
to  intimate  their  suspicion  with  regard  to  the  authorship 
of  the  recent  publication  ;  but  this  demand  was  not  again 
repeated,  and  no  direct  notice  was  taken  of  the  book  itself 
But  whether  the  work  in  question  w^as  to  any  considerable 
extent  the  production  of  the  Assembly  Divines  or  not,  this 
at  least  is  certain,  that  it  is  the  most  complete  and  able 
defence  of  Presbyterian  Church  government  that  has  yet 
appeared,  and  places  its  divine  right  on  a  foundation  which 
will  not  easily  be  shaken. f 

Allusion  has  been  made  to  events  of  great  public  impor- 

*  BailHe,  vol.  ii.  p.  411. 

t  A  reprint  of  this  work  would  be  a  verjf  valuable  contribution  to  the 
Presbyterian  cause  in  the  present  day. 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBLV.  '23 J 

tance,  which  contributed  not  a  little  to  change  the  tone 
of  the  Parliament.  These  maybe  briefly  meniioiied.  The 
military  affiiirs  of  the  year  liilb  terminated  most  disas- 
trously for  the  king.  All  his  armies  were  beaten  out  of 
the  field,  and  he  was  constrained  to  retreat  to  Oxford  with 
the  wreck  of  his  troops,  and  there  to  try  what  coidd  be 
gained  by  intrigues  and  negotiations,  since  he  could  no 
lotiger  maintain  an  open  war.  During  the  course  of  these 
negotiations  there  arose  a  degree  of  alienation  between 
the  English  Parliament  and  the  Scottish  commissioners 
and  Parliament,  which  threatened  an  open  rupture.  The 
English  Parliament,  influenced  by  Cromwell  and  his 
friends,  were  not  desirous  of  peace  ;  while  the  Scottisli 
commissioners  made  every  eff'ort  to  procure  such  terms 
as  the  king  might  accept  without  absolute  submission.  It 
was  while  their  temper  was  in  this  high  and  heated  state, 
that  the  English  Parliament  treated  the  petitions  of  the 
city  ministers,  and  of  the  Assembly  itself,  with  that  scant 
courtesy,  if  not  rather  overbearing  haughtiness,  which  has 
been  already  related.  Elated  with  success,  they  could  not 
brook  the  firm  and  fearless  attitude  assumed  by  the  Pres- 
byterian divines,  and  re^jented  the  remonstrances  of  the 
Scottish  commissioners  and  Parliament,  as  an  improper  in- 
terference with  their  imperial  dignity.  At  this  very  junc- 
ture the  king,  despairing  of  obtaining  from  the  English 
Parliament  any  terms  to  which  he  could  accede,  left  Ox- 
ford in  disguise,  on  the  27th  of  April,  and  after  wandering 
about  for  a  few  days,  arrived  at  the  quarters  of  the  Scot- 
tish army,  which  was  besieging  Newark,  on  the  .^th  of 
May,  164r6.  This  was  totally  unexpected  by  either  the 
army  or  the  commissioners  of  Scotland;  for  though  his 
majesty  had  attempted  to  induce  the  Scottish  general  and 
Committee  of  Estates  to  espouse  his  cause  against  the  Par- 
liament, he  had  received  such  an  answer  from  them,  as 
rendered  it,  in  their  opinion,  impossible  that  he  would  put 
himself  into  their  power.  No  sooner  was  this  event  known 
in  London  than  the  tone  and  temper  of  the  Parliament  was 
very  sensibly  changed.  They  perceived  that  it  was  no 
longer  safe  to  treat  the  remonstrances  of  Scotland  with 
disrespect  ;  and  as  they  were  well  aware  how  much  the 
establishment  of  Presbyterian  Church  government  in  both 
kingdoms  was  longed  for  by  the  Scottish  Church  and  peo« 
20* 


234  HISTORY    OF    THE 

pie,  they    deemed    it    expedient    to   remove  some    of   the 
obstacles  by  which  this  had  been  hitherto  prevented. 

Up  till  this  time  the  ordinance  of  March  14-,  for  the 
choice  of  ruling  elders  and  the  erection  of  presbyteries, 
had  not  received  the  full  ratification  of  the  House  of 
Lords  ;  and  even  if  it  had,  it  would  have  been  inoperative, 
because  the  ministers  v/ere  resolute  not  to  become  mem- 
bers of  Presbyteries,  so  long  as  they  were  subject  to  such 
Erastian  interference,  and  so  bereft  of  their  due  powers, 
as  would  have  been  the  case  under  that  ordinance.  But 
on  the  5th  of  June  both  Houses  not  only  ratified  the  ordi- 
nance, and  on  the  9th  issued  an  order  that  it  should  be  im- 
mediately put  into  execution,*  but  also  at  the  same  jm.e 
laid  aside  the  clause  respecting  provincial  commissioners 
to  judge  of  new  cases  of  scandal, — thus  removing  the 
main  obstacle  to  its  reception  by  the  ministers.  This  con- 
cession having  been  made,  the  Assembly  Divines  and  thj 
city  ministers  met  at  Sion  College,  on  the  19th  of  June, 
and  after  some  conference,  agreed  upon  a  declaration,  ex- 
pressing approbation  of  what  had  been  done,  specifying 
what  was  still  defective,  and  declaring  that  they  now  con- 
ceive it  to  be  their  duty  to  put  in  practice  the  present  set- 
tlement, as  far  as  they  conceive  it  correspondent  with  the 
Word  of  God.f 

The  actual  erection  of  Presbyteries  did  not  immediately 
follow  this  ordinance  of  Parliament,  and  consent  of  the 
Assembly  and  the  city  ministers;  for  the  attention  of  the 
whole  community  was  strongly  attracted  to  the  negotia- 
tions between  the  king  and  the  Parliaments  of  the  two 
kingdoms,  as  also  between  the  two  Parliaments  them- 
selves. It  scarcely  falls  within  our  province  to  relate  even 
an  outline  of  the  political  intrigues  which  distracted  the 
kingdom  for  many  months  after  his  majesty's  retreat  to 
tlie  Scottish  army;  j^et  so  much  must  be  stated  as  is  ne- 
cessary to  explain  the  bearing  of  these  events  upon  the 
proceedings  of  the  Assembly.  There  is  every  reason  to 
believe  that  the  determination  of  the  king  to  seeka  retreat 
in  the  Scottish  army,  was  the  result  of  a  complication  of 
circumstances  and  of  intrigues, — circumstances  which  he 

♦  Whitelocke,  p.  213. 

t  Baillie,  vol.  ii,  p.  377 ;    Neal,  vol.  ii.  p.  396.     In  this  instance  also 
the  account  of  Neal  is  unfair  and  inaccurate,  to  use  no  harsher  terms. 


WKs'iMiNS'iTK  /\ssr.r:;.i.Y.  235 

could  not  control,  and  intriirnes  in  wliich  he  and  his  adhe- 
rents were  mutually  deceivers  and  deceived.  The  fortune 
of  war  had  been  decisively  against  him,  so  that  he  could 
no  longer  expect  to  recover  his  power  by  conquest ;  and 
the  demands  of  the  Parliament  rose  with  their  success,  so 
that  he  was  constrained  to  contemplate  the  necessity  o-f 
submission,  if  he  could  not  contrive  to  divide  his  victori- 
ous antagonist.  For  that  purpose  he  carried  on  a  series 
of  intrigues  with  all  parties  that  would  listen  to  him,  par- 
ticularly with  the  Independents  in  both  army  and  Parlia- 
ment. The  decided  ground  taken  by  the  Scottish  Parlia- 
ment, Church,  and  nation,  in  behalf  of  their  religious  liber- 
ties, as  stated  in  their  Covenant,  which  he  regarded  with 
intense  hostility,  rendered  him  unwilling  to  hold  intercourse 
\\ith  them,  and  at  the  same  time  made  it  more  than  doubt- 
ful whether  any  measure  of  success  could  be  expected  to 
follow  such  an  attempt.  But  the  disagreement  which  took 
place  between  the  English  Parliament  and  the  Scottish 
commissioners  seemed  to  give  some  reason  to  hope  that, 
by  skilful  management,  it  might  at  last  be  possible  to  dis- 
unite the  kingdoms,  and  through  their  disunion  to  recover 
his  own  ascendency  over  both.  A  French  agent  was  ser:t 
to  the  Scottish  army  to  sound  the  Committee  of  Estates, 
who  were  with  it  ;  and  upon  receiving  a  half-favorable  re- 
port from  this  agent,  the  king  resolved  to  go  in  person  lo 
the  Scottish  army, — hoping,  by  such  an  apparent  act  of 
confidence  in  their  honor  and  loyaltj^  to  render  it  impossi- 
ble for  them  to  do  otherwise  than  espouse  his  cause.  But 
his  private  agent  deceived  him, — he  deceived  himself, — • 
and  the  Scottish  generals  and  statesmen  were  not  deceived. 
At  the  very  first  interview  wliich  the  king  had  with  his 
Scottish  subjects,  they  gave  him  distinctly  to  know,  that 
they  neither  could  nor  would  do  anything  contrary  to  their 
engagement  with  England  in  the  Solemn  League  and 
Covenant,  or  to  the  spirit  of  that  sacred  document.  And 
in  a  letter  to  the  Committee  of  both  kingdoms,  written 
immediately  after  his  majesty's  arrival,  they  declared, 
"  That  they  were  astonished  at  the  providence  of  the  king's 
coming  to  their  army ;  and  desired  that  it  might  be  im- 
proved to  the  best  advantage  for  promoting  the  work  of 
uniformity,  for  settling  of  religion  and  righteousness,  and 
attaining  of  peace,  according  to  the  Covenant  and  Treaty, 


236  HISTORY    OF    THE 

by  advice  of  the  Parliaments  of  both  kingdoms,  or  their  corn- 
missioners  :  And  they  further  declare,  that  there  hath  been 
no  treaty  betwixt  his  majesty  and  them  ;  and  in  so  deep  a 
business  they  desire  the  advice  of  the  Committee  of  both 
kingdoms.  '*  The  king  soon  perceived  that  he  had  both 
overrated  his  own  personal  influence  and  undervalued  the 
power  of  religions  principle, — that  he  had  deceived  him- 
self, and  had  now  to  do  wnth  men  who  w^ere  too  sagacious 
to  be  deluded,  and  too  high-principled  to  be  turned  from 
the  path  of  integrity  and  truth.  Finding  that  he  \vas  not 
likely  to  gain  the  object  which  he  had  in  view^,  the  king 
wrote  to  the  English  Parliament,  requesting  permission 
"  to  come  to  London  wdth  safety,  freedom,  and  honor  ;" 
declaring  that  he  was  resolved  "  to  comply  w^ith  the  Houses 
in  wdiat  should  be  most  for  the  good  of  his  subjects.  The 
Parliament  itself  had  previously  resolved  to  demand  the 
king's  person,  declaring,  ''  Tliat  in  England  the  disposal  of 
him  belonged  to  the  Parliament  of  England,  and  that  the 
Scots  army  were  in  pay  of  the  Parliament  of  England  ;  that 
the  king  ought  to  be  near  his  Parliament ;  and  that  this  was 
consonant  to  the  Covenant."!  And  in  order  to  get  quit  of 
the  Scottish  army  as  quickly  as  possible  they  voted,  a 
few  days  afterwards,  "  That  this  kingdom  had  no  further 
need  of  the  army  of  their  brethren  the  Scots  in  this  king- 
dom.'' So  early  was  it  apparent  that  the  English  Parlia- 
ment was  determined  to  obtain  possession  of  their  sove- 
reign's person,  and  that  the  Scottish  nation  could  not 
o.lierwise  protect  him  than  by  friendly  negotiation,  so  as 
to  secure  a  peace  including  his  safety;  or  by  declaring 
war  against  England  in  his  behalf,  contrary  to  their  obli- 
gations in  the  Solemn  League  and  Covenant,  and  contrary 
to  their  ow^n  determination  to  defend  religious  liberty, — of 
which  the  king  w^as  the  known  and  determined  enemy. 
This  they  saw  clearly  ;  and  being  at  the  same  time  aware 
of  the  republican  inclinations  of  Cromwell  and  his  strong 
party,  they  perceived  that  the  only  way  in  which  they 
could  interfere  to  preserve  his  majesty,  without  incurring 
the  guilt  of  perjury,  was  to  persuade  him,  if  possible,  to 
sign  the  Covenant,  and  consent  to  the  establishment  of 
Presbyterian  Church  government.  But  to  this  no  force  of 
argument,  no  urgency  of  persuasion,  no  tearful  earnest 
*  Whitelocke,  p.  210.  f  Ibid. 


WESTiAllNsTRR   ASSKMBLV.  237 

ness  of  entreaty,  could  induce  him  to  consent  ;  and  after 
spending-  several  monllis  in  ti  uitlcss  ne<T^otiations,  they  were 
constrained  to  abandon  the  impracticable  attemp'c,  and 
leave  him  to  pursue  the  fatal  course  along  which  he  was 
driven  by  his  own  wilful  and  infatuated  obstinacy,  and  by 
the  pernicious  advice  of  his  narrow-minded  and  selfish 
prelatic  counsellors. 

it  may  be  necessary  here  to  state,  what  it  would  not  be 
difficult  to  prove  beyond  the  power  of  dispute,  did  our  limits 
and  the  nature  of  this  work  permit,  that  there  was  no  con- 
nection whatever  between  the  payment  of  the  arrears  due 
to  the  Scottish  arm3^  and  the  surrendering  of  the  king  to 
the  English  Parliament.  A  short  statement  of  facts  is  all 
that  can  here  be  given  ;  but  that  may  be  enough,  at  least 
to  every  mind  not  thickly  encrusted  with  prejudice.  From 
the  time  when  the  victories  of  the  English  armies  rendered 
them  able  to  cope  with  the  king  without  the  assistance  of 
the  Scottish  forces,  the  Parliament  was  desirous  to  secure 
?he  entire  glory  and  advantage  of  the  triumph  to  them- 
selves. For  this  purpose  thej-  did  everything  in  their  power 
to  irritate  and  disparajre  the  Scottish  army.  They  with- 
held the  payment  of  the  troops,  constraining  them  to  have 
recourse  to  the  ungracious  procedure  of  levying  the  means 
of  subsistence  from  the  inhabitants  of  the  country  ;  and 
they  listened  readily  to  the  complaints  which  were  made 
of  these  exactions.  Thus  hampered  and  discouraged,  the 
Scottish  army  was  unable  to  perform  any  signal  exploit, 
w'lile  Fairfax  and  Cromwell  received  every  aid  and  encou- 
ragement that  Parliament  could  give.  The  Scottish  army 
was  naturally  indignant  at  such  treatment,  and  even  enter- 
tained some  apprehension,  that  if  Fairfax  should  take  Ox- 
ford, and  obtain  possession  of  the  king's  person,  he  would 
direct  his  force  against  them,  and  compel  them  to  fight, 
or  to  retire  without  anything"  having  been  accoinplished  fur 
which  they  had  entered  England.  Their  position  at  New- 
ark, almost  in  the  centre  of  the  kingdom,  rendered  this 
peculiarl}'  hazardous  ;  and  therefore,  as  soon  as  the  king 
came  to  the  army,  and  Newark  surrendered,  they  began 
their  march  northwards,  and  ceased  not  till  they  arrived 
at  Newcastle,  where  they  took  up  their  quarters,  waiting 
the  course  of  negotiations  to  secure  peace,  if  practicable, 
and  occupying  a  favorable  position  for  war,  if  peace  could 


238 


HISTORY    OF    THE 


not  be  obtained,  and  the  king  should  be  persuaded  to  sigE 
the  Covenant. 

Even  before  the  negotiations  for  peace  commenced  on 
the  19th  of  May,  the  English  Parliament  voted,  that  an 
hundred  thousand  pounds  should  be  paid  to  the  Scottish 
army,  one  half  after  they  should  have  surrendered  New- 
castle, Carlisle,  and  the  other  English  garrisons  in  theii 
possession,  and  the  other  half  after  their  advance  into  Scot 
land.*  The  Scottish  commissioners,  knowing  that  the  Par 
liament  had  not  the  means  of  obtaining  a  large  supply  of 
money  without  the  consent  and  support  of  the  city  of  Lon 
don,  gladly  availed  themselves  of  the  idea  which  this  ofTei 
suggested,  and  demanded  a  much  larger  sum,  with  the 
strong  conviction  that  the  Parliament  neither  could  noi 
would  grant  their  demands,  and  that  during  the  delay 
caused  by  this  new  element  of  negotiation,  they  might  per 
suade  the  king  to  consent  to  the  offered  terms  of  peace. 
"It's  all  our  skill,"  says  Baillie,  "to  gain  a  little  time. 
Their  first  offer  to  us  was  of  one  hundred  thousand  pounds 
sterling,  for  the  disbanding  of  our  arm3^  We,  this  day 
(August  18th),  gave  them  in  a  paper,  wherein  we  were  per- 
emptor  for  more  than  double  that  sum  for  the  present,  be- 
side the  huge  sums  which  we  crave  to  be  paid  afterward 
They  have  appointed  a  committee  to  confer  with  us;  we 
are  in  some  hopes  of  agreement.  The  money  must  be 
borrowed  in  the  city,  and  here  will  be  the  question  ;  they 
are  our  loving-  friends  ;  but  before  they  will  part  with  more 
m.iney  they  will  press  hard  the  disbanding-  of  their  own 
army  as  well  as  ours."f  Again  he  says,  "  When  the  king's 
unhappy  answer  to  the  commissioners  came  hither,  it  was 
our  great  care  to  divert  this  Parliament  from  all  delibera- 
tion about  the  king,  till  he  had  yet  some  more  time  of 
advice.  We  cast  in  the  debate  of  our  army's  return,  and 
rendering  the  garrisons."  On  the  1st  of  September  the 
House  of  Commons  held  a  long  debate  on  the  demand  of 
the  Scottish  army's  payment ;  and  on  the  5th  of  the  same 
month  voted  the  sum  of  two  hundred  thousand  pounds  on 
their  advance  to  Scotland,  if  it  could  be  raised,  and  ap- 
pointed a  committee  to  manage  the  matter.J  But  so  far 
from  this  being  the  price  of  the  king's  surrender  to  the 

•  Whitelocke,  p.  211.  f  Baillie,  vol.  ii.  p.  39 L 

t  Whitelocke,  pp.  225,  226. 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEMnLY.  23? 

Parliament,  the  question  respectino-  the  disposal  of  his  per- 
son  continued  to  be  keenly  debated  between  the  two  kincr- 
doms  for  above  four  months  longer,  before  Scotland  would 
consent  to  relinquish  the  desperate  and  hopeless  task  of 
endeavoring  to  save  the  infatuated  and  uncomplying  king. 
During  that  period  Charles  wrote  repeatedly  to  the  English 
Parliament,  expressing  his  desire  to  be  near  them,  the 
more  speedily  and  effectually  to  conclude  the  long-conti- 
nued negotiations.  Sadly  and  unwillingly  at  last  the  Scot- 
tish Committee  of  Estates  relinquished  the  care  of  his 
majesty's  person  to  the  commissioners  of  the  English  Par- 
liament, on  the  30th  of  January,  1647,  according  to  the 
terms  of  the  agreement  to  that  effect  which  had  been  con- 
cluded between  the  two  kingdoms,  and  published  in  the 
form  of  a  declaration  by  the  Scottish  Parliament  on  the 
16th  of  January. 

The  simple  statement  of  these  facts  and  dates  ought  to 
be  enough  to  sec  aside  for  ever  the  false  and  calumnious 
assertion  that  Scotland  sold  her  king.  The  payment  of 
the  army's  arrears  was  voted  by  the  English  Parliament  on 
the  5th  of  September ;  the  negotiations  respecting  the 
king  were  not  concluded  till  the  16th  of  January.  It  was 
impossible  to  preserve  him,  without  a  breach  of  the  League 
with  England,  a  violation  of  the  National  Covenant,  and 
the  forcible  retention  of  their  sovereign's  person,  against 
his  own  will,  even  when  engaging  in  a  perilous  war  against 
a  more  powerful  kingdom  in  his  defence.  His  own  incu- 
rable dissimulation  and  obstinacy  uro-ed  him  on  his  fate, 
which  Scotland  foresaw  and  deplored,  but  could  not  avert. 
To  return  to  the  subject  more  immediately  within  our 
province.  Although  the  Assembly  Divines  and  the  city 
ministers  had  expressed  their  opinion  that  they  could  at 
length  consent  to  put  into  practical  operation  the  Presby- 
terian Church  government,  as  sanctioned  by  Parliament, 
they  still  complained  of  its  defectiveness,  and  were  in  no 
haste  to  form  themselves  into  Presbyteries.  Kepeated  ap- 
plications were  made  to  Parliament  for  the  removal  of  the 
obstacles  that  still  remained  ;  and  on  the  22d  of  April, 
1647,  the  Houses  published  resolutions,  entitled,  "Reme- 
dies for  removing  some  obstructions  to  Church  govern- 
ment;" in  which  they  ordered  letters  to  be  sent  to  the 
several  counties  of  England,  requiring  the  ministers  imme- 


240  HISTORY    OF    THE 

diately  to  form  themselves  into  distinct  Presbyteries  ;  and  ap- 
pointing tlie  ministers  and  elders  of  the  several  Presbyteries 
of  the  province  of  London,  to  hold  their  provincial  Assem- 
bly in  the  Convocation-house  of  St.  Paul's,  on  the  first 
Monday  of  May.  According  to  this  appointment,  the  first 
meeting  of  the  provincial  Assembly  or  Synod  of  London 
was  held  on  the  3d  of  May,  1647.*'  At  this  Synod  there 
were  about  one  hundred  and  eight  persons  present,  and  Dr. 
Gouge  was  chosen  prolocutor  or  moderator.  The  province 
of  London  was  divided  into  twelve  Presbyteries ;  and  in 
the  formation  of  the  Synod  each  Presbytery  chose  two 
ministers  and  four  elder^s,  as  their  representatives,  or  com- 
missioners. The  ministers  of  Lancashire  were  also 
formed  into  Presbyteries  and  a  Synod  ;  and  in  many  other 
counties  they  associated  themselves  for  the  management 
of  ecclesiastical  affairs,  though  not  in  the  regular  form  of 
Presbyteries  and  Synods. 

There  was  now  no  positive  obstruction  to  the  regular 
and  final  organization  of  Presbyterian  Church  government, 
except  the  still  pending  treaties  between  the  king  and  the 
Parliament.  Knowing  the  king's  attachment  to  Prelacy 
and  his  strong  dislike  to  Presbytery,  the  Parliament  did 
not  wish  to  make  a  final  and  permanent  establishment  of 
the  latter  form  of  Church  government  till  they  should  have 
endeavored  to  persuade  his  majesty  to  consent,  so  that  it 
might  be  engrossed  in  the  treaty,  and  thereby  obtain  the 
conclusive  ratification  of  the  royal  signature.  But  after 
the  army  had  for  a  time  overawed  the  Parliament,  when 
the  Houses  again  recovered  something  like  the  free  exer- 
cise of  their  legislative  functions,  they  voted,  "  That  the 
king  be  desired  to  give  his  sanction  to  such  acts  as  shall 
be  presented  to  him,  for  settling  the  Presbyterian  govern- 
ment for  three  years,  with  a  provision  that  no  person  shall 
be  liable  to  any  question  or  penalty,  only  for  non-conform- 
ity to  the  said  government,  or  to  the  form  of  divine  ser- 
vices appointed  in  the  ordinances.  And  that  such  as  shall 
not  voluntarily  conform  to  the  said  form  of  government 
and  divine  service,  shall  have  liberty  to  meet  for  the  ser- 
vice and  worship  of  God,  and  for  exercise  of  religious  du- 
ties and  ordinances,  in  a  fit  and  convenient  place,  so  as  no- 
thing be  done  by  them  to  the  peace  of  the  kingdom.  And 
*  Rushworth,  vol.  vi.  p.  476. 


WESTiMi;»ST>:R    ASSEMBLY.  241 

provided  that  this  extend  not  to  any  toleration  of  the  Popish 
religion,  nor  to  any  penalties  imposed  upon  Popish  recu- 
sants, nor  to  tolerate  the  practice  of  anything;  contrary  to 
the  principles  of  Christian  religion,  contained  in  the  Apos- 
tles' creed,  as  it  is  expounded  in  the  Articles  of  the  Church 
of  England.  Nor  to  anything  contrary  to  the  point  of 
faith  for  the  ignorance  whereof  men  are  to  be  kept  from 
the  Lord's  Supper  ;  nor  to  excuse  any  from  the  penalties 
for  not  coming  to  hear  the  Word  of  God  on  the  Lord's 
day,  in  any  church  or  chapel,  unless  he  can  show  a  rea- 
sonable cause,  or  was  hearing  the  Word  of  God  preached 
or  expounded  elsewhere."  These  were  the  votes  of  the 
Lords  ;  and  to  these  the  Commons  added,  "  That  the  Pres- 
byterian government  be  established  till  the  end  of  the  next 
session  of  Parliament,  which  was  to  be  a  year  after  that 
date.  That  the  tenths  and  maintenance  belonging  to  any 
church  shall  be  only  to  such  as  can  submit  to  the  Presby- 
terian government,  and  to  none  other.  That  liberty  of 
conscience  granted  shall  extend  to  none  that  shall  preach, 
print,  or  publish  anything  contrary  to  the  first  fifteen  of 
the  Thirty-nine  Articles,  except  the  eighth.  That  it  ex- 
tend not  to  Popish  recusants,  or  taking  away  any  penal 
law  against  them.  That  the  indulgence  to  tender  con- 
sciences shall  not  extend  to  tolerate  the  Common  Prayer."* 
These  votes  were  passed  on  the  13th  day  of  October,  1647, 
and  may  be  regarded  as  the  final  settlement  of  the  Presby- 
terian Church  government,  so  far  as  tliat  was  done  by  the 
Long  Parliament,  in  accordance  with  the  advice  of  the 
Westminster  Assembly  of  Divines.  For  before  the  expira- 
tion of  the  period  named  by  the  Parliament,  the  Parlia- 
ment itself  had  sunk  beneath  the  powder  of  Cromwell,  whose 
policy  was  to  establish  no  form  of  Church  government,  but 
'/O  keep  everything  dependent  upon  himself,  though  his 
chief  favors  were  bestowed  upon  the  Independents. 

There  is  but  one  point  more  connected  with  the  Erastian 
controversy  which  requires  to  be  stated,  namely,  its  effect 
upon  the  formation  and  ratification  of  the  Confession  of 
Faith.  For  a  considerable  time  after  the  Assembly  com- 
menced its  deliberations,  the  chief  subjects  which  occupied 
its  attention  were,  the  Directories  for  public  worship,  and 
ordination,  and  the  form  of  Church  government,  including 
•  Whitelocke,  pp.  275,  276. 
21 


24£  HISTORY    OP    THE 

the  power  of  Church  censure.  Till  some  satisfactory  con- 
clusions had  heen  reached  on  these  points,  the  Assemhly 
abstained  from  entering  upon  the  less  agitating,  but  not 
less  important  work  of  framing  a  Confession  of  Faith. 
But  having  completed  iheir  task,  so  far  as  depended  upon 
themselves,  they  appointed  a  committee  to  prepare  and 
arrange  the  main  propositions  which  were  to  be  discussed 
and  digested  into  a  system  by  the  Assembly.  The  mem- 
bers of  this  committee  were.  Dr.  Hoyle,  Dr.  Gouge,  Messrs. 
Herle,  Gataker,  Tuckney,  Reynolds,  and  Vines,  with  the 
Scottish  commissioners.  These  learned  and  able  divines 
]»egan  their  labors  by  arranging  in  the  most  systematic 
(.>rder  the  various  great  and  sacred  truths  which  God  has 
revealed  to  man  ;  and  reduced  these  to  thirty-two  distinct 
heads  or  chapters,  each  having  a  title  expressive  of  its  sub- 
ject. These  were  again  subdivided  into  sections;  and 
the  committee  formed  themselves  into  several  sub-com- 
mittees, each  of  whom  took  a  specific  topic  for  the  sake 
of  exact  and  concentrated  deliberation.  When  these  sub- 
committees had  completed  their  respective  tasks,  the 
whole  was  laid  before  the  entire  committee,  and  any  altera- 
tions suggested  and  debated  till  all  were  of  one  mind.  And 
when  any  title  or  chapter  had  been  thus  fully  prepared  by 
the  committee,  it  was  reported  to  the  Assembly,  and  again 
subjected  to  the  most  minute  and  careful  investigation,  in 
every  paragraph,  sentence,  and  word.  It  is  exceedingly 
gratifying  to  be  able  to  state,  that  throughout  the  delibera- 
tions of  the  Assembly,  when  composing  the  Confession  of 
Faith,  there  prevailed  almost  an  entire  and  perfect  har- 
i.nony.  There  appear,  indeed,  to  have  been  only  two  sub- 
jects on  which  any  difference  of  opinion  existed  among 
them.  The  one  of  these  was  the  doctrine  of  election,  con- 
cerning which,  as  Baillie  says,  they  had  long  and  tough  de- 
bates :  "  Yet,"  he  adds,  "  thanks  to  God,  all  is  gone  right 
according  to  our  mind."*  The  other  was  that  of  which 
mention  has  been  already  made,  namely,  that  "  the  Lord 
Jesus,  as  King  and  Head  of  his  Church,  has  therein  ap- 
pointed a  government  in  the  hand  of  Church-officers  dis- 
tinct from  the  civil  magistrate,"  which  appears  as  the  fun- 
damental proposition  of  the  chapter  entitled  "  Of  Church 
censures."  This  proposition  the  Assembly  manifestly 
•  Baillie,  vol.  ii.  p.  325. 


WESTMlNSTEIi    ASSEM15LY.  243 

intended  and  understood  to  contain  a  principle  directly  and 
neces-iarily  opposed  to  the  very  essence  of  Erastianism  ; 
and  it  was  regarded  in  the  same  light  by  the  Erastians 
themselves,  consequently  it  became  the  subject  of  long  and 
earnest  discussion,  and  was  strenuously  opposed  by  Light- 
foot  and  Coleman,  especially  the  latter.  But  Coleman 
falling  ill  and  dying  before  the  debate  was  concluded,  it 
was  carried,  the  sole  dissentient  voice  being  that  of 
Lightfoot. 

It  does  not  appear  thai  the  Erastian  lay-assessors  at- 
tempted to  debate  the  point  in  the  Assembly,  but  wisely, 
or  at  least  cunningly,  reserved  their  opposition  for  the 
House  of  Commons,  being  aware  that  their  strength  lay  in 
power,  not  argument.  The  whole  influence  of  the  Eras- 
tians did  not  succeed  in  modifying,  no,  not  by  one  word, 
the  statement  of  the  Assembly's  faith  on  this  vital  point ; 
although  some  have  had  the  hardihood  to  assert  that  they 
condescended  to  compromise  the  question.  The  conduct 
of  the  Assembly  in  the  Erastian  controversy  contrasts 
strongly  with  their  conduct  in  the  Independent  contro- 
versy- With  the  Independents  there  w-ere  many  instances 
of  compromise  and  accommodation,  or  at  least  of  attempts 
in  that  direction  ;  with  the  Erastians  none,  no,  not  so  much 
as  one.  They  could  not  compel  the  Parliament  to  give  its 
sanction  to  all  that  they  proposed  ;  but  they  could  and  did 
state  freely  and  fearlessly  what  they  believ^ed  to  be  the 
truth,  earnestly  and  urgently  petitioning  that  it  might  be 
ratified,  then  leaving  the  legislative  powers  to  accept  or 
reject  on  their  own  responsibility.  To  the  Independents, 
on  ihe  other  hand,  they  showed  the  utmost  leniency  ;  and 
while  they  could  not  abandon  their  own  conscientious  con- 
victions^, they  were  extremely  reluctant  to  deal  harshly 
with  the  conscientious  scruples  of  men  whom  they  regarded 
as  brethren. 

Some  discussion  took  place  on  the  thirty-first  chapter  in 
the  Confession,  respecting  Synods  and  Councils  5  but  that 
subject  also  was  carried  in  the  express  language  of  the  As- 
seni])ly,  and  without  any  Erastian  modification.  The  first 
half  of  the  Confession  was  laid  before  the  Parliament  early 
in  October,  IGiG,  and  on  the  2Gth  of  November  the  remain- 
der was  produced  to  the  Assembly  in  its  completed  form, 
when  the  prolocutor  returned  thanks  to  the  committees,  in 


2414"  HISTORY    OF    THE 

the  name  of  the  Assembly,  for  their  great  pains  in  perfect* 
ing  the  work  committed  to  them.  It  was  then  carefully 
transcribed  ;  and  on  the  3d  of  December,  1646,  it  was  pre- 
sented to  Parliament,  by  the  whole  Assembly  in  a  body, 
under  the  title  of  "  The  humble  advice  of  the  Assembly  of 
Divines  and  others,  now  by  the  authority  of  Parliament 
sitting  at  Westminster,  concerning  a  Confession  of  Faith." 
On  the  7th,  Parliament  ordered  "  five  hundred  copies  of  it 
to  be  printed  for  the  members  of  both  Houses  ;  and  that  the 
Assembly  do  bring  in  their  marginal  notes,  to  prove  every 
part  of  it  by  Scripture."*  There  is  strong  reason  to 
believe  that  the  House  of  Commons  demanded  the  insertion 
of  the  Scripture  texts,  for  the  purpose  of  obtaining  an  ad- 
ditional period  of  delay,  as  indeed  Baillie  pretty  plainly 
intimates. 

The  Assembly,  accordingly,  resumed  their  task,  and 
after  encountering  a  number  of  interposing  obstacles,  again 
produced  the  Confession  of  Faith,  with  full  scriptural  proofs 
annexed  to  all  its  propositions,  and  laid  it  before  the  Par- 
liament on  the  29th  day  of  April,  1647.  The  thanks  of  the 
House  were  given  to  tlie  Assembly  for  their  labors  in  this 
important  matter;  and  "  six  hundred  copies  were  ordered 
to  be  printed  for  the  use  of  the  Houses  and  the  Assembly, 
and  no  more,  and  that  none  presume  to  reprint  the  same, 
till  further  orders."! 

The  appointed  number  of  copies  having  been  printed 
they  were  delivered  to  the  members  of  both  Houses  by 
Mr.  Byfield,  on  the  19th  of  May,  when  it  was  resolved  to 
consider  the  whole  production,  article  by  article,  previous 
to  its  being  published  with  the  sanction  of  Parliament,  as 
the  Confession  of  Faith  held  by  that  Church  on  which  they 
meant  to  confer  the  benefits  of  a  national  establishment. 
But  the  deliberations  of  the  Parliament  were  interrupted 
by  the  insurrection  of  the  army,  and  the  numerous,  pro- 
tracted, and  unsatisfactory  negotiations  in  which  they  were 
engaged  with  the  king ;  so  that  they  had  not  completed 
their  examination  of  the  Confession  till  March,  1648.  On 
the  22d  day  of  that  month  a  conference  was  held  between 
the  two  Houses,  to  compare  their  opinions  respecting  the 
Confession  of  Faith,  the  result  of  which  is  thus  stated  by 
Rushworth :  "  The  Commons  this  day  (March  22d),  at  a 
*  Whitelocke,  p.  233.  f  Rushworth,  vol.  vi.  p.  473. 


WESTMI.NSTKR    .AS.>F.M|[.V.  24C: 

f  onference,  presented  the  Lords  with  the  Confession  of 
Faith  passed  by  thenn,  with  some  alterations,  viz.,  That 
they  do  agree  with  their  Lordsliips,  and  so  with  the  As- 
sembly, in  the  doctrinal  part,  and  desire  the  same  may  be 
made  public,  that  this  kingdom,  and  all  the  Reformed 
Ctmrches  of  Christendom,  may  see  the  Parliament  of  Eng- 
land difler  not  in  doctrine.  In  some  particulars  there  were 
some  phrases  ahered,  as  in  that  o^  tiibvte  being  due  to  the 
magistrate,  they  put  dues  ;  to  the  degree  of  marriage  they 
refer  to  the  law  established  ;  particulars  in  discipline  »are 
recommitted  5  and  for  the  title,  they  make  it  not  ^  Jl  Co?i- 
fcsswn  of  Failh^''  because  not  so  running  '  I  confess ^^  at  the 
beginning  of  every  section  ;  but,  '  Articles  of  Faith  agreed 
upon  by  both  Houses  of  Parliament^  as  most  suitable  to  the 
former  title  of  the  Thirty-nine  Articles."* 

Such  was  the  last  positive  enactment  made  by  the  Eng- 
lish Parliament  respecting  the  Confession  of  Faith  ;  for 
the  subsequent  mention  made  of  it,  and  of  other  particulars 
in  Presbyterian  Church  government,  during  the  course  of 
iheir  negotiations  with  the  king,  were  not  enactments,  but 
attempts  at  accommodation  with  his  majesty,  with  the  view 
of  endeavoring  to  secure  a  satisfactory  basis  for  a  perma- 
nent peace  to  Church  and  State.  And  it  will  be  observed, 
that  the  only  material  defect  mentioned  in  this  reported 
conference  betv/een  the  Houses  is,  that  ^'■particulars  in  dis- 
cipline are  recommitted.'''  These  "  particulars"  are  said  to 
have  been  the  thirtieth  chapter,  "  Of  Church  censures;" 
the  thirty-first  chapter,  "  Of  Synods  and  Councils  ;"  and 
the  fourth  section  of  the  twentieth  chapter,  "  Of  Christian 
liberty,  and  liberty  of  conscience."  The  enumeration  of 
these  particulars  rests  on  the  authority  of  Neal,f  which  is 
by  no  means  unimpeachable,  but  it  is  in  itself  probable, 
being  quite  consistent  with  the  views  of  the  Erastians, 
whose  chief  hostility  was  directed  against  the  power  of 
Church  discipline,  of  which  the  chapters  specified  contain 
an  explicit  statement  according  to  the  judgment  of  the 
Assembly.  It  is  of  some  importance  to  remark,  that  these 
"particulars  in  discipline"  were  not  rejected  by  the  English 
Parliament,  as  is  generally  asserted,  but  merely  recommit- 
ted, or  referred  to  a  committee  to  be  more  maturely  con- 
sidered. But  as  the  Parliament  itself  not  long  afterwards  fell 
*  Rushworth,  vol.  vii.  p.  1035.  f  Neal,  vol.  ii.  p.  429. 

21* 


246  HISTORY    OF    THE 

under  the  power  of  the  army,  and  was  at  length  forcibly 
dissolved  by  Cromwell,  the  Committee  never  returned  a 
report,  and  consequently  these  particulars  were  never  either 
formally  rejected  or  ratified  by  the  Parliament  of  England. 
The  fact  of  their  having  been  recommitted  is  of  itself 
enough  to  prove  that  they  were  not,  in  the  estimation  of 
snch  men  as  Selden  and  Whitelocke,  susceptible  of  an 
Erastian  interpretation,  although  such  an  opinion  has  been 
hazarded  by  men  certainly  not  a  little  their  inferiors  in 
learning,  legal  acumen,  and  intellectual  power. 

A  full  account  of  the  literature  of  the  Erastian  contro- 
versy would  be  an  extremely  interesting  and  highly  im- 
portant production  ;  but  to  attempt  anything  more  than  a 
very  brief  outline  of  it  here  would  lead  to  a  digression  far 
beyond  our  limits.  We  shall  therefore  mention  almost 
solely  those  works  which  were  either  written  by  some  of 
the  Westminster  Divines,  or  were  closely  connected  with 
the  proceedings  of  that  venerable  assembly.  A  few  pre- 
liminary sentences,  however,  may  be  of  use  to  introduce 
the  subject. 

During  the  earliest  ages  of  Christianity  the  only  rela- 
tionship in  which  the  civil  magistrate  and  the  Church 
stood  towards  each  other,  was  that  which  exists  between 
persecutors  and  the  persecuted.  When  at  length  Constan- 
tino avowed  himself  a  Christian,  persecution  ceased,  and 
the  more  friendly  relation  of  granting  and  receiving  pro- 
tection became  that  between  the  State  and  the  Church. 
But  Christianity  had  already  become  deeply  tainted  with 
the  antichristian  leaven  ;  Prelacy  had  raised  its  haughty 
head,  equally  inclined  to  domineer  over  what  it  regarded 
as  the  inferior  orders  of  the  clergy,  and  over  the  people, 
and  to  arrogate  to  itself  exemption  from  the  control  of  the 
civil  magistrate,  even  in  civil  matters.  A  protracted 
struggle  ensued  between  the  imperial  and  royal  powers 
and  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  the  issue  of  which  was,  not 
merely  an  exemption  of  ecclesiastical  matters,  and  even 
persons,  from  civil  authority,  but  the  establishment  of  a 
supremacy  over  civil  rulers  and  civil  matters  wielded  by 
the  Romish  hierarchy,  and  forming  a  complete  spiritual 
and  civil  despotism.  This  fearful  and  degrading  despotism 
was  overthrown  by  the  Reformation ;  and  although  the 
great  and   wise  Christian  divines  and   patriots  by   whose 


WESTMINSTER  ASSEMBI-Y.  247 

instrumentality  the  Reformation  was  effected,  were  unable 
entirely  to  perfect  their  work,  yet  they  all,  more  or  less 
clearly,  indicated  their  judgment  that  the  two  jurisdictions, 
civil  and  ecclesiastical,  ought  to  be,  and  to  remain  co-or- 
dinate and  distinct,  mutually  supporting-  and  supported,  but 
each  abstaining  from  interference  with  the  other's  intrinsic 
and  inherent  rights,  privileges,  and  powers.  In  some 
countries  this  high  and  true  theory  was  clearly  developed, 
in  others  more  obscurely,  and  in  some  not  at  all.  In  no 
part  of  Reformed  Christendom  was  it  so  distinctly  stated, 
and  so  fully  realized,  as  in  Scotland  ;  and  nowhere  was  it 
so  thoroughly  rejected  as  in  England.  In  England,  indeed, 
the  exact  counterpart  of  the  Romish  system  was  establish- 
ed, the  king's  ecclesiastical  supremacy  rendering  him 
equally  judge  of  ecclesiastical  as  of  civil  matters.  It  was 
soon  found  that  in  this,  as  in  all  other  things,  extremes 
meet ;  the  king,  by  a  slight  transfer  of  terms,  became  a 
civil  pope,  and  the  country  was  oppressed  by  a  complete 
civil  and  spiritual  despotism. 

In  the  mean  time,  the  great  principle  of  truth  and  free- 
dom, the  principle  of  distinct  and  co-ordinate  civil  and 
ecclesiastical  jurisdictions,  was  assailed  on  the  Continent 
by  Erastus,  and  became  a  subject  of  speculative  thought 
and  controversial  literature.  Unfortunately  for  the  cause 
of  truth  and  freedom,  the  great  men  of  the  Reformation 
had  nearly  all  departed  from  the  scene  of  their  labors  and 
triumphs  before  the  Erastian  theory  was  fully  brought  for- 
ward, so  that  it  was  not  at  once  met  and  overthrown  as  it 
would  otherwise  have  been.  And  besides,  it  was  too  ac- 
cordant with  the  views  and  feelings  of  men  of  secular  minds 
not  to  obtain  a  ready  credence  and  a  hearty  welcome  from 
politicians,  who  can  form  no  higher  idea  of  a  Church  than 
an  engine  of  State,  from  lawyers  who  can  conceive  no 
higher  rule  than  statutory  enactments,  and  from  irreligious 
and  immoral  men,  who  equally  detest  and  fear  the  strict 
and  pure  severity  of  divinely  authorized  Christian  disci- 
pline. In  England,  also,  the  despotism  of  the  Prelatic 
hierarchy  tended  to  produce,  in  the  minds  of  all  zealous 
assertors  of  freedom,  an  instinctive  dread  of  ecclesiastical 
power,  and  rendered  many  men  Erastians  from  terror  and 
in  self-defence,  not  because  they  had  studied  the  theory, 
and  been  convinced  of  its  truth.     Such  men  were  ready  to 


248  HISTORY    OF    THE 

Oppose  the  establishment  of  Presbyterian  Church  govern- 
ment on  the  ground  of  divine  right,  not  because  they  were 
convinced  that  no  system  of  Church  government  can 
justly  lay  claim  to  an  authority  so  high  and  sacred  ;  but 
because  they  were  apprehensive  that  it  would  produce  a 
species  of  spiritual  despotism  as  oppressive  as  that  which 
they  had  just  been  striving  to  abolish.  In  vain  did  the 
Scottish  statesmen  and  divines  answer  and  refute  their  ob- 
jections ;  their  fears  were  not  removed,  and  fear  is  a  men- 
tal emotion  that  cannot  be  set  aside  by  argument. 

But  Selden,  Whitelocke,  Lightfoot,  and  Coleman  took 
up  the  subject  on  other  grounds,  which,  though  difficult, 
were  not  equally  unassailable  by  reason.  Their  chief  argu- 
ment was  one  of  analogy,  although,  as  they  used  it,  the 
appearance  which  it  bore  was  that  of  identity.  They  held 
that  the  Christian  system  ought  to  resemble,  or  rather  to 
be  identical  with,  the  system  of  the  Mosaic  Dispensation  ; 
and  they  attempted  to  prove,  that  there  were  not  two  dis- 
tinct and  co-ordinate  courts,  one  civil  and  the  other  eccle- 
siastical, among  the  Hebrews,  but  that  there  was  a  mixed 
jurisdiction,  of  which  the  king  was  the  supreme  and  ultimate 
head  and  ruler,  and  that,  consequently,  the  civil  courts  de- 
termined all  matters,  both  civil  and  ecclesiastical,  and 
inflicted  all  punishments,  both  such  as  affected  person  and 
property,  and  such  as  affected  a  man's  religious  privileges, 
properly  termed  Church  censures.  From  this  they  con- 
cluded, that  the  civil  magistrate,  in  countries  avowedly 
Christian,  ought  to  possess  an  equal,  or  identical  authority, 
and  ought  consequently  to  be  the  supreme  and  ultimate 
judge  in  all  matters,  both  civil  and  ecclesiastical,  inflicting 
or  removing  the  penalties  of  Church  censure  equally  with 
those  affecting  person  and  property.  The  arguments  on 
which  they  most  relied  were  drawn  from  rabbinical  lore, 
rather  than  from  the  Bible  itself,  although  they  were  very- 
willing  to  obtain  the  appearance  of  its  support,  by  ingenious 
versions,  or  perversions  of  peculiar  passages  of  Scripture. 
Selden's  argument  has  been  already  stated,  and  need  not 
be  repeated.  The  value  of  Lightfoot's  authority  may  be 
estimated  somewhat  lower  than  is  usually  done,  if  we  take 
into  consideration,  not  merely  the  amount  of  his  learning, 
but  the  soundness,  or  the  reverse,  of  his  judgment.  As,  for 
instance,  he    strenuously    maintained   that    the    Jews    arc 


WESTMINSTET?     ASSr.?IBL\'.  249 

Utterly  and  finally  rejected,  that  those  of  them  who  em- 
braced Christianity  in  the  time  of  Christ  and  the  apostles 
were  the  "remnant  to  be  saved,"  and  that  there  neither 
then  was,  nor  ever  shall  be,  any  universal  callinj^  of  them.* 
He  held  also,  that  the  expressions,  "the  keys  of  the  king- 
dom of  heaven,"  and  "  binding-  and  loosing,"  had  no  refer- 
ence to  discipline,  but  merely  to  doctrine,  in  which  opinion 
he  differed  from  almost  every  person,  both  before  and  since 
his  time.  His  opinion  of  the  Septuagint  was  equally  at 
variance  with  the  views  of  the  most  eminently  learned  and 
judicious  men.  In  short,  whatever  may  be  said  of  his  ex- 
tensive and  minute  rabbinical  lore,  it  is  impossible  to  regard 
his  judgment  as  entitled  to  much  deference,  consequently 
his  advocacy  of  Erastian  principles  will  not  avail  much  for 
their  support. 

Mention  has  already  been  made  of  Coleman's  sermon, 
preached  before  the  House  of  Commons,  on  the  30th  of 
July,  164'5.  That  sermon  must  be  noticed  as  part  of  the 
Erastian  literature,  not  so  much  on  account  of  its  own 
merits,  as  on  account  of  other  w^orks  to  the  composing  of 
which  it  gave  occasion.  Towards  the  end  of  the  sermon, 
various  advices  and  directions  are  given,  as  calculated  to 
promote  the  peace  and  welfare  of  the  kingdom  ;  and  of 
these,  one  point;  on  which  Coleman  dwelt  strongly  was,  the 
unity  of  the  Church,  and  the  best  way  to  procure  that  unity. 
For  this  he  gives  several  directions,  of  whicii  the  following 
are  the  chief: — ''  1.  Establish  as  few  things  jure  divino  as 
can  well  be.  Hold  out  the  practice,  but  not  the  ground. 
2.  Let  all  precepts  held  out  as  divine  institutions  have  clear 
Scriptures;  an  occasional  practice,  a  phrase  upon  the  by, 
a  thing  named,  are  too  weak  grounds  to  uphold  such  a 
building.  I  could  never  yet  see  how  tw^o  co-ordinate  gov 
ernments,  exempt  from  superiority  and  inferiority,  can  be 
in  one  State;  and  in  Scripture,  no  such  thing  is  found,  that 
I  know  of.  3.  Lay  no  more  burden  of  government  upon 
the  shoulders  of  ministers  than  Christ  hath  plainly  laid  upon 
them  ;  let  them  have  no  more  hand  therein  than  the  Holy 
Ghost  clearly  gives  them.  The  ministers  will  have  other 
work  to  do,  and  such  as  will  take  up  the  whole  man.  1 
ingenuously  profess  I  have  a  heart  that  knows  belter  how 
to  be  governed  than  to  govern;  I  fear  an  ambitious  en* 
*  Lightroot,  vol.  i.  p.  165. 


250  HISTORY  OF    THE 

snarement,  and  I  have  cause.  I  see  what  raised  Prelacy 
and  Papacy  to  such  a  height,  and  what  their  practices  Avere. 
being  so  raised.  Give  us  doctrine  ;  take  you  the  govern- 
ment. Give  me  leave  to  make  this  request,  in  the  name 
of  the  ministry;  give  us  two  things,  and  we  shall  do  well : 
— give  us  learning,  and  give  us  a  competency.  4.  A  Chris- 
tian magistrate,  as  a  Christian  magistrate,  is  a  governor  in 
the  Church.  All  magistrates,  it  is  true,  are  not  Christians  ; 
but  that  is  their  fault  :  all  should  be  ;  and  when  they  are, 
they  are  to  manage  their  office  under  and  for  Christ. 
Christ  hath  placed  governments  in  his  Church.  Of  other 
governments  besides  magistracy  I  find  no  institution  ;  of 
them  I  do.  I  find  all  government  given  to  Christ,  and  to 
Christ  as  Mediator  ;  and  Christ,  as  head  of  these,  given  to 
the  Church.  To  rob  the  kingdom  of  Christ  of  the  magis- 
trate and  his  governing  power,  I  cannot  excuse,  no,  not 
from  a  kind  of  sacrilege,  if  the  magistrate  be  His."* 

Sentiments  such  as  these  could  not  but  be  agreeable  to 
the  Erastian  members  of  parliament;  yet  they  seem  to 
have  thought  that  Coleman  had  spoken  with  more  plain- 
ness than  prudence,  for  while  they  ordered  the  sermon  to 
be  printed,  as  was  customary,  they  did  not  give  him  the 
thanks  of  the  House  -an  omission  which  was  extremely 
unusual.  But  the  principles  stated  in  Coleman's  sermon 
were  not  allowed  to  remain  longr  unassailed.  On  the  27th 
of  August  George  Gillespie  preached  a  sermon  before  the 
House  of  Lords  ;  and  when  it  was  published,  he  appended 
to  it  a  small  pamphlet  of  nine  leaves,  entitled  "A  Brotherly 
Examination  of  some  Passages  of  Mr.  Coleman's  late  print- 
ed Sermon."  In  this  short  treatise,  Gillespie  not  only  an- 
3wered  and  refuted  Coleman,  but  also  completely  turned 
his  arguments  against  himself;  proving,  ^zri/,  that  the  pro- 
per rule  for  human  conduct  in  all  things,  but  especially  in 
religious  matters,  was  to  obtain  as  much  of  divine  guidance, 
or  to  establish  as  much  by  divine  right  as  possible.  He 
then  proceeds  to  examine  in  succession  Coleman's  direc- 
tions or  rules  in  a  very  masterly  manner,  annihilating  or 
reversing  each  with  great  strength  and  clearness  of  argu- 
ment. It  is  proved,  that  Coleman's  principle,  that  in  every 
divine  institution  Scripture  must  speak  expressly,  would 
involve  a  dangerous  tampering  with  Scripture,  and  would 
•  Coleman's  Sermon,  pp.  24-28. 


V;!  STMLXSTRR    A.SSi  M  !;LY.  251 

sweep  away  several  important  Christian  institutions  which 
were  never  doubted  ;  and  also,  that  whatever,  by  necessary 
consequence,  is  drawn  from  Sciipture,  is  a  divine  truth,  aa 
well  as  what  is  expressly  written  therein.  The  argument 
of  co-ordinate  jurisdictions  is  next  taken  up,  and  thoroughly 
established  both  by  argument  and  by  illustration.  And  in 
answer  to  Coleman's  assertion,  that  he  can  find  no  institu- 
tion of  any  government  except  magistracy,  Gillespie  proves 
from  Scripture,  that  obedience  is  directly  commanded  to 
spiritual  governors,  who  are  "  over  us  in  the  Lord,"  and 
who  must  have  been  distinct  from  the  civil  magistrate  at 
a  time  when  there  was  no  Christian  magistracy.  In  a  short, 
but  very  clearly  stated  argument,  Gillespie  refutes  Cole- 
man's dangerous  assertion,  ''  that  all  government  is  given 
to  Christ  as  Mediator,  and  Christ,  as  head  of  these,  given 
to  the  Church  ;"  and  states  the  distinction  between  Christ's 
government  as  God  and  as  Mediator,  by  the  right  under- 
standing of  which  important  idea  the  whole  Erastian  con- 
troversy must  be  decided. 

Coleman  soon  afterwards  published  a  pamphlet,  eruitled, 
"  A  Brotherly  Examination  Re-examined,'  which  is  dis 
tinguished  chiefly  by  boldness  of  assertion  and  feebleness 
of  argument  To  this  Gillespie  replied  in  another,  bearing 
the  title,  "  Nihil  Respondes,"  in  which  he  somew^iat 
sharply  exposed  the  weakness  of  his  antagonist's  reasoning. 
Irritated  by  the  castigation  he  had  received,  Coleman  pub- 
lished a  bitter  reply,  to  which  he  gave  the  not  very  intelli- 
gible title  of  ''  Male  Dicis  Maledicis," — meaning,  doubtless, 
to  insinuate,  that  Gillespie's  answer  was  rather  of  a  railing 
character,  or,  to  use  a  phrase  of  modern  times,  displayed 
a  bad  spirit.  This  Gillespie  answered  in  an  exceedingly 
viu^orous  pamphlet,  entitled,  "Male  Audis,"  in  w^hich  he 
swept  rapidly  over  the  whole  Erastian  controversy,  so  far 
as  Coleman  and  some  of  his  friends  had  brought  it  for\yard, 
convicted  him  and  them  of  numerous  self-contradictions, 
of  unsoundness  in  theology,  of  violating  the  covenant 
which  they  had  sv.'orn,  and  of  inculcating  opinions  fatal  to 
both  civil  and  religious  liberty.  To  this  Coleman  did  not 
attempt  to  reply,  feeling,  probably,  that  he  was  over- 
matched. 

Several  of  these  controversial  pamphlets  appeared  in  the 
course  of   the  year  1646  ;  and  towards  the  close  of  the 


252  HISTOKY  OF  THE 


same  year,  Gillespie  published  his  celebrated  work,  "Aaron's 
Rod  Blossoming ;  or,  the  Divine  ordinance  of  Church 
Government  Vindicated."  In  this  remarkably  able  and 
elaborate  production,  Gillespie  took  up  the  Erastian  con- 
troversy as  stated  and  defended  by  its  ablest  advocates, 
fairly  encountering  their  strongest  arguments,  and  assailing 
their  most  formidable  positions,  in  the  frank  and  fearless 
manner  of  a  man  thoroughly  sincere,  and  thoroughly  con- 
vinced of  the  truth  and  goodness  of  his  cause.  The  work 
is  divided  into  three  books;  the  first  treating  "Of  the 
Jewish  Church  Government;"  the  seco?id,  "  Of  the  Chris- 
tian Church  Government;  and  the  l/urd^  "Of  Excommu- 
nication from  the  Church,  and  of  Suspension  from  the 
Lord's  Table."  In  the  first  book,  the  five  following  pro- 
positions are  demonstrated  : — "  1.  That  the  Jewish  Church 
was  formally  distinct  from  the  Jewish  State.  2.  That 
there  was  an  ecclesiastical  sanhedrim  and  government 
distinct  from  the  civil.  3.  That  there  was  an  ecclesiastical 
excommunication  distinct  from  civil  punishments.  4.  That 
in  the  Jewish  Church  there  was  also  a  public  exomologesis, 
or  declaration  of  repentance,  and  thereupon  a  reception  or 
admission  again  of  the  offender  to  fellowship  with  the 
Church  in  the  holy  things.  5.  That  there  was  a  suspen- 
sion of  the  profane  from  the  temple  and  passover."  In 
this  part  of  his  work  Gillespie  boldly  met  and  completely 
overthrew  the  united  strength  of  Selden,  Lightfoot,  and 
Coleman,  on  their  own  chosen  field  of  Hebrew  learning. 

In  the  second  book  or  part  of  his  work,  "  Of  the  Chris- 
tian Church  Government,"  the  main  element  of  the  contro- 
versy which  he  had  to  encounter  is  of  a  nature  so  abstract, 
that  it  requires  peculiar  clearness  of  thought  and  accuracy 
of  reasoning  to  keep  the  subject  intelligible,  and  to  draw 
the  requisite  distinctions.  Coleman  had  in  his  sermon 
said^  that  "a  Christian  magistrate,  as  a  Christian  magis- 
trate, is  a  governor  in  the  Church,"  and  that  "  all  govern- 
ment is  given  to  Christ  as  Mediator,  and  Christ,  as  head 
of  these,  is  given  to  the  Church  ;"  from  this  he  drew, 
though  not  very  distinctly,  the  inference,  that  the  Chris- 
tian magistrate  is  directly  the  vicegerent  of  Christ,  and 
therefore  rules  in  the  Church  ;  yet  when  pushed  on  this 
point  he  recoiled,  and  modified  his  inference  so  as  to  state 
It  in  the   following   terms,  "  that  magistracy  is  given  to 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBLY.  253 

Christ  to  be  serviceable  in  his  kingdom."  But  this  tnodi 
tied  statement  would  not  have  answered  the  purposes  of 
the  Erastians  ;  and  therefore  their  principle  was  more 
boldly  and  plainly  expressed  by  Mr.  Hussey,  minister  at 
Chesllhurst,  in  Kent.  This  thorough  Erastian  boldly 
maintained,  both  "that  all  government  is  given  to  Christ 
as  Mediator,  and  that  Christ,  as  Mediator,  has  placed  the 
Christian  magistrate  under  him,  and  as  his  vicegerent,  and 
has  given  him  commission  to  govern  the  Church."  It  will 
be  at  once  perceived,  that  the  very  terms  of  this  proposi- 
tion involved  an  inquiry  into  the  nature  and  extent  of 
Christ's  mediatorial  sovereignty.  To  this  point,  accord- 
ingly, Gillespie  directed  his  attention,  in  his  answer  to 
Hussey's  argument.  He  draws  the  distinction  between 
the  power  and  sovereignty  of  Christ,  as  the  Eternal  Son 
of  God,  and  as  God-man  and  Mediator.  Considered  as  the 
Eternal  Son  of  God,  as  the  Word  by  whom  the  universe 
was  called  into  being,  he  necessarily  rules  over  all,  and 
magistrates  derive  their  power  from  him  :  considered  as 
God-man  and  Mediator,  his  direct  sovereignty  is  in  and 
over  the  Church,  which  is  his  body  ;  and  all  power  ha.s 
been  given  to  him  both  in  heaven  and  in  earth,  to  be  wield- 
ed by  him  for  the  safety  and  the  extension  of  his  spiritual 
kingdom.  A  further  distinction  is  drawn  by  Gillespie  be- 
twixt power  over  and  power  in  any  kingdom,  which  are  not 
necessarily  identical,  although  the  one  may  be  employed 
for  the  purpose  of  promoting  and  securing  the  other.  In 
this  argument,  some  have  thought  that  Gillespie  has  drawn 
his  distinctions  too  fine,  more  so  than  was  necessary  for 
his  argument,  or  than  many  would  be  able  to  follow  or 
willing  to  admit.  Beyond  all  question,  he  has  overthrown 
the  Erastian  theory,  "  that  the  civil  magistrate  is  Christ's 
vicegerent,  and  appointed  to  govern  the  Church  ;"  but 
some  have  been  afraid  that  one  aspect  of  his  argument 
might  seem  to  countenance  the  Voluntary  theory,  and  to 
exempt  civil  government  from  the  duty  and  responsibility 
of  giving  countenance  and  support  to  the  Church.  Cer- 
tainly no  such  idea  was  ever  in  Gillespie's  mind,  nor  is  it 
my  opinion  that  his  reasoning,  rightly  understood,  gives 
it  the  least  shadow  of  support.  Besides,  if  there  be  any 
danger  arising  from  the  extreme  fineness  with  which  his 
distinctions  are  drawn  in  that  branch  of  his  argument,  it  is 

90 


254'  HISTORY    OF    THK 

completely  removed  by  the  succeeding  chapter,  in  which 
he  treats  "  of  the  power  and  privilege  of  the  magistrate  in 
things  and  causes  ecclesiastical,  what  it  is,  and  what  it  is 
not."  It  w^ould  be  well  if  magistrates  would  study  care- 
fully the  passage  alluded  to,  that  they  might  acquire  some 
information  respecting  the  proper  nature  and  boundaries 
of  their  duties  and  responsibilities,  cicra  sacrn^  about  reli- 
gious matters,  as  distinguished  from  what  they  have  al- 
ways been  so  eager  to  usurp,  power  in  sncris,  in  religious 
matters,  which  forms  no  part  of  their  peculiar  duty,  and 
is  not  within  their  province. 

The  third  book,  "  Of  Excommunication  from  the  Church, 
and  of  Suspension  from  the  Lord's  Table,''  has  the  appear- 
ance of  being  an  answer  to  Prynne,  who  had  written  largely 
against  the  exercise  of  such  power  by  Church-officers. 
But  it  is  evident  that  Gillespie  had  more  in  view  than 
merely  to  answer  Prynne.  He  makes  no  express  reference 
to  the  Parliament's  J//S  dhnnum  queries,  but  he  meets  them 
nevertheless,  and  gives  to  them  very  conclusive  answers, 
while  appearing  to  be  merely  replying  to  a  less  formidable 
antagonist.  The  very  tenor  of  Prynne's  writings  gave  him 
this  opportunity,  for  Prynne  kept  as  closely  to  the  line  of 
the  Parliamentary  queries  as  he  with  propriety  could,  so  that 
Gillespie  was  both  enabled  and  fairly  entitled  to  answer 
both  at  once,  so  far  as  they  were  identical  or  similar.  The 
work,  in  short,  is  a  very  complete  refutation  of  the  whole 
Erastian  theory,  taking  up  its  leading  points  systematical- 
ly, clearing  away  all  obscurities  of  language,  reducing 
every  argument  to  its  elementary  principles,  stating  these 
in  the  form  of  simple  propositions,  and  in  terms  strictly 
defined,  so  as  to  preclude  sophistry  or  mere  verbal  subtle- 
ties, and  proceeding  to  refute  error  and  demonstrate  truth, 
in  a  manner  singularly  clear  and  forcible,  displaying,  each 
in  a  very  high  degree,  extensive  learning,  sound  judgment, 
intellectual  acuteness  and  strength,  and  the  pure  and  lofty 
spirit  of  genuine  Christianity. 

Another  very  able  and  elaborate  work  on  the  Erastian 
controversy  was  written  and  published  also  in  the  year 
1646,  by  Samuel  Rutherford,  entitled,  "The  Divine  Right 
of  Church  Government  and  Excommunication."  Although 
Rutherford  manifests  a  thorough  understanding  of  the  sub- 
ject, and  treats  very  fully  of  all  its  main  elements,  exhibit- 


W  KSTM I NSTE  li     ASS  KM  \U.Y. 


255 


inff  great  learning  and  extreme  minuteness  in  thonght,  ar- 
gument, and  illustration,  his  work  is  not,  upon  the  whole, 
so  successful  as  that  of  Gillespie.  It  is  defective  in  point 
of  arrano-ement,  and  especially  for  want  of  a  statement  of 
the  systematic  order  which  the  author  meant  to  follow, 
though  it  is  perfectly  plain  that  in  his  own  mind  there  was 
a  system  by  which  he  regulated  his  course  of  argument. 
But  the  very  minuteness  of  his  learning  and  his  reasonings 
is  felt  to  obscure,  or  rather  to  overlay  the  subject;  and 
while  tracing  out  every  point  of  detail,  the  general  impres- 
sion is  either  weakened,  or  fails  to  be  forcibly  conveyed. 
This,  however,  is  criticism  according  to  modern  taste  ;  for 
the  style  of  the  times  when  Rutherford  wrote,  was  to  ex- 
haust every  subject  under  discussion,  and  to  leave  nothing 
unsaid  upon  it  that  could  be  said.  In  this  respect,  there- 
fore, Rutherford  merely  followed  the  spirit  of  the  age  in 
which  he  lived  ;  and  whosoever  will  carefully  peruse  his 
very  elaborate  work,  will  obtain  ample  materials  for  the 
refutation  of  Erastianism. 

There  appeared  another  work  at  that  time,  not  indeed 
written  by  one  of  the  Assembly  of  Divines,  but  so  inti- 
mately connected  with  the  controversies  which  were 
ao-itated  among  th-em,  that  it  deserves  to  be  mentioned 
here.  This  was  a  treatise  written  by  the  celebrated  Apol- 
lonius  of  Middleburg,  entitled  "  Consideratio  Quarundam 
Controversiarum  ad  Regimen  Ecclesise  Dei  Spectantium, 
qua)  in  Anglise  Regno  hodie  Agitantur."  When  this  trea- 
tise was  published,  a  copy  of  it  was  sent  to  each  member 
of  the  Westminster  Assembly.  "  It  was,"  says  Baillie, 
"  not  only  very  well  taken,  but  also,  which  is  singular,  and 
so  far  as  I  remember,  alisque  exemplo^  it  was  ordered, 
nt^mint  contraJicente^  to  write  a  letter  of  thanks  to  Apollo- 
nius."*  The  spirit  of  this  work  is  thoroughly  Presbyte- 
rian, encountering  alike  the  theories  of  the  Independents 
and  the  iii  astians.  It  consists  of  seven  chapters,  each 
treating  of  a  separate  topic  briefly,  but  with  great  clear- 
ness and  force  of  reasoning.  They  are  as  follows: — "  1. 
Concerning  the  qualification  of  Church  members.  2  Con- 
cernino-  a  Church  covenant.  3.  Concerning  the  Church 
visible  and  instituted.  4-.  Concerning  power  ecclesiastical. 
5,  Concerning  ecclesiastical  ministry  and  its  exercise.  6. 
Concerning  Classes  (Presbyteries)  and  Synods,  and  their 
•    Baillie,  vol.  ii.  p.  246. 


256  HISTORY  or  TI!£ 

authority.  7.  Concerning  forms  or  directories  of  faith  and 
worship."  It  will  at  once  be  seen,  that  in  the  discussion 
of  these  topics  the  learned  author  must  come  into  direct 
collision  Avith  both  the  Independents  and  the  Erastians  ;  yet 
his  work  has  very  little  of  a  merely  controversial  charac- 
ter, being  a  calm  and  dispassionate,  but  very  clear  and  able 
disquisition  concerning  these  important  theological  ques- 
tions. There  is  another  very  valuable  work  by  the  same 
author,  written  a  short  time  before  the  meeting  of  the 
Westminster  Assembly,  but  treating  very  fully  of  the  Eras- 
tian  theory.  Its  title  is,  "  Jus  Majestatis  Circa  Sacra  ;  sive 
Tractatus  Theologicus  de  jure  Magistratus  circa  reseccle- 
siasticas."  A  translation  of  this  work,  for  the  purpose  of 
general  circulation,  would  be  a  very  valuable  contribution  to 
tiie  cause  of  religious  liberty,  which  is  at  present  beset 
by  so  many  and  such  formidable  enemies. 

But  we  must  quit  this  digression,  however  alluring  the 
subject,  and  return  to  what  remains  to  be  stated  respecting 
the  concluding  labors  of  the  Westminster  Assembly. 
Enough,  if  the  attention  of  the  reader  has  been  directed 
lo  some  of  the  most  important  v/orks  relating  to  the  great 
Erastian  controversy,  which  he  may  peruse  for  himself. 
And  we  do  not  hesitate  to  say,  tlmt  it  is  scarcely  possible 
for  any  man,  especially  for  any  Christian,  to  engage  in  a 
study  of  deeper  and  more  universal  importance.  For  it  di- 
rectly involves  the  glory  of  the  Mediator,  as  sole  head  of  his 
body  the  Church,  and  sole  Kmg  in  Zion,  his  spiritual  king- 
dom,— the  purity,  peace,  and  freedom  of  the  Church,  in  its 
administration,  and  in  the  rights  and  privileges  of  its  mem- 
bers,—the  moral  and  religious  welfare  of  the  community, 
as  involved  in,  and  flowing  from,  the  efficiency  and  the 
extension  of  true  and  living  Christianity,  the  divinely  ap- 
pointed remedy  for  the  miseries  of  fallen  mankind, — and 
even  the  progress  of  civilisation,  the  maintenam^e  of  peace, 
and  the  stability  of  kingdoms,  as  all  depending  upon  the 
blessing  and  the  favor  and  the  protection  of  Him  who  is 
"  Prince  of  the  kings  of  the  earth."  And  it  is  so  eminently 
the  great  controversy  of  the  present  day,  that  upon  its 
right  or  wrong  determination  depends  the  continuance  of 
peace  throughout  ^  hristendom,  or  the  speedy  commence- 
ment of  commotions  and  conflicts  of  the  most  portentous 
nature,  shaking  the  foundations  of  society,  and  ending  in 
wide-spread  anarchy  and  desolation. 


CHAPTER    V 


CONCLUSION    OF    THE    WESTMINSTER    iiSSEMBLY. 

The  Larger  and  Shorter  Catechisms — Inquiry  concernino:  their  Author 
ship — Departure  of  the  Scottish  Commissioners — Final  Dissolution  of 
the  Westminster  Assembly — The  Ratification  of  the  Directory  of 
Worship  and  of  Church  Government  by  the  Church  of  Scotland — 
Also  of  the  Confession  of  Faith,  with  an  Explanation  Guarding 
against  any  Erastian  Construction — Brief  View  of  Public  Events  con- 
nected with  tlie  Assembly's  Proceedings — Struggle  between  the  Par- 
liament and  the  Army — Cromwell's  Usurpation — Death  of  Charles  I. 
— Dissolution  of  the  Long  Parliament  and  the  Westminster  Assembly 
— Synod  of  London — The  Independents  in  Power — Committee  of 
Triers — The  Savoy  Confession — Restoration  of  Charles  II. — Prelacy 
Restored — Act  of  Uniformity  and  Ejection  of  Two  Thousand  Presby- 
terian Ministers  on  St.  Bartholomew's  Day — Retrospective  Review 
and  Summary  of  the  Westminster  Assem.bly's  Proceedings — Religious 
Uniformity  in  the  Three  Kingdoms  by  Mutual  Consultation,  intended 
to  Form  the  Basis  of  a  Secure  and  Permanent  Peace — Erastian  Ele- 
ment and  its  Consequences — Mutual  Misunderstandincrs — Mutual 
Agreement — Effect  on  the  Universities — On  Theolosrical  Literature — 
On  Education — State  of  the  Kingdom  and  Army — Sectarinns — Tolera- 
tion— Its  True  Nature  Intimated — How  Misunderstood  by  both  Par- 
ties—Liberty  of  Conscience — Unlimited  Toleration  not  Granted  by 
the  Independents  when  in  Power— Great  Idea  of  a  General  Protest- 
ant Union  entertained  by  the  Westminster  Assembly — How  yet  At- 
tainable— Conclusion. 

Although  the  chief  duties  for  which  the  Assembly  of 
Divines  were  summoned  to  meet  at  Westminster,  may  be 
regarded  as  having  been  discharged  when  they  had  pre- 
pared and  laid  before  the  Parliament  Directories  for  Public 
Worship  and  Ordination,  a  Form  of  Government,  Eules  of 
Discipline,  and  a  Confession  of  Faith,  yet  there  remained 
several  matters,  subordinate  indeed,  but  still  important,  on 
account  of  which  they  continued  to  sit  and  deliberate  for 
some  time  longer,  an  outline  of  which  we  now  proceed  to 
give,  before  offering  some  concluding  remarks  on  the 
whole  subject. 

22* 


258  HISTORY    OF    THE 

A  catechism  for  the  instruction  of  children  and  of  the 
comparatively  ignorant  in  religious  truth  will  always  be 
regarded  as  a  most  important  matter  by  every  true  Chris- 
tian Church  ;  and  as  the  Catechism  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land was  undeniably  both  meagre  and  unsound,  it  formed 
a  part  of  the  Assembly's  duty  to  prepare  a  more  accurate 
and  complete  catechism,  as  a  portion  of  the  national  sys- 
tem to  be  established.  The  attention  of  the  Assembly 
was  occupied  almost  entirely  by  the  discussions  respecting 
the  Directories  of  Ordination  and  Worship,  till  towards 
the  end  of  1644-.  They  then  began  to  prepare  for  compos- 
ing a  Confession  of  Faith  and  a  Catechism  ;  and  according 
to  their  usual  course  of  procedure,  committees  were  ap- 
pointed to  draw  up  an  outline,  in  regular  systematic  order, 
for  the  consideration  of  the  Assembly.  But  the  progress 
of  the  Assembly  in  these  points  was  retarded  by  the  va- 
rious events  which  have  been  already  related,  so  that  little 
was  done  till  towards  the  end  of  May,  164.'i.  The  commit- 
tees from  that  time  forward  carried  on  their  labors  in  pre- 
paring the  Confession  and  the  Catechism  simultaneously,  but, 
as  Baillie  says,  "  languidly,  the  minds  of  the  divines  being 
enfeebled  by  the  delay  of  the  House  to  grant  the  petition 
respecting  power  to  exclude  scandalous  persons  from  com- 
munion." After  some  progress  had  been  made  with  both, 
the  Assembly  resolved  to  finish  the  Confession  first,  and 
then  to  construct  the  Catechism  upon  its  model,  so  far  at 
least  as  to  have  no  proposition  in  the  one  which  was  not 
in  the  other  ;  by  which  arrangement  there  would  be  left 
scarcely  any  ground  for  subsequent  debate  and  delay.* 
But  political  movements,  answers  to  the  Independents  and 
to  the  Erastians,  and  other  disturbing  influences,  so  impeded 
the  Assembly's  progress,  that  the  Catechisms  were  not  so 
speedily  completed  as  had  been  expected.  The  Shorter 
Catechism  was  presented  to  the  House  of  Commons  on  the 
.5th  of  November,  1647,  and  the  Larger  on  the  14th  of 
April,  1648.  After  they  had  been  carefully  perused  by  the 
Parliament,  an  order  was  issued  on  the  15th  of  September, 
1648,  commanding  them  to  be  printed  for  public  use.  The 
king,  during  his  residence  in  the  Isle  of  Wight,  after  many 
solicitations,  consented  to  license  the  Shorter  Catechism, 

*  BaiUie,  vol.  ii.  p.  379. 


WF.STMIN.sTER    ASSEMBLV.  259 

with  a  suitable  preface  ;  but  as  the  negotiations  did  not  end 
in  a  treaty,  that  consent  was  never  realized. 

There  had  been  many  inquiries  in  order  to  ascertain,  it 
possible,  by  whom  the  original  draught  or  outline  of  the 
Catechism  was  prepared,  but  hitherto  without  success.  In 
our  opinion,  there  is  no  reason  to  think  it  w^as  done  by  any 
one  person.  Committees  were  appointed  to  prepare  every- 
tliinor  that  was  to  be  brought  before  the  Ass^embly.  AVe 
find  no  separate  committee  named  expressly  for  the  pur- 
pose of  drawing  up  the  Catechism  ;  and  we  find  repeated 
proofs  of  a  very  close  connection  between  the  Catechism 
and  the  Confession.  It  may  reasonably  be  inferred  that 
both  subjects  were  conducted  by  the  same  committee, 
M'hich  w^is  composed  of  Drs.  Gouge  and  Hoyle,  and  Messrs. 
Herle,  Gatak'i,  Tuckney,  Reynolds,  Vines,  and  the  Scot- 
tish Ministers.  Some  add  Arrowsmith,  and  Palmer  ;  both 
men  of  great  piety,  learning  and  abilities,  and  the  latter 
termed  by  Baillie  "  the  best  catechist  in  England."  Pal- 
mer, it  appears,  was  appointed  to  draw  up  a  section  in  the 
Directory  of  Public  Worship,  on  catechising  ;  but  it  did 
not  give  satisfaction,  and  that  topic  was  not  inserted  in  the 
Directory.*  Scarcely  could  it  be  called  an  unfair  infer- 
ence, were  we  to  conclude  from  this  fact  that  Palmer  had 
no  peculiar  share  in  framing  the  Catechism.  It  may  be 
mentioned,  that  Dr.  Arrowsmith  was  appointed  Master  of 
St.  John's  College,  Cambridge,  in  the  year  1644,  befo.re  the 
Catechism  was  begun,  and  that  his  attendance  upon  the 
Assembly  after  that  period  was  only  occasional,  in  conse- 
quence of  the  new  sphere  of  duties  on  which  he  was  called 
to  enter.  Mr.  Palmer  was  also  constituted  Master  of 
Queen's  College,  Cambridge,  in  the  same  year  ;  but  he 
continued  to  attend  the  Assembly  very  constantly  till  the 
time  of  his  death,  in  the  year  164-7 — at  w^hich  time  the 
Catechism  was  still  unfinished.  It  has  been  also  conjec- 
tured, that  the  first  outline  of  the  Catechism  may  have  been 
drawn  by  Dr.  Wallis,  one  of  the  scribes  of  the  Assembly 
at  that  period,  and  afterwards  so  justly  celebrated  as  Savi- 
lian  Professor  of  Geometry  at  Oxford,  and  one  of  the  first 
mathematicians  of  the  age.  This  conjecture  may  have 
arisen  from  the  fact  that  he  wrote  a  short  treatise,  entitled, 
"  A  Brief  and  Easy  explanation  of  the  Shorter  Catechism  ;" 
*  Baillie,  vol.  ii.  p.  148. 


260  HISTORY    OF    THE 

which  was  so  much  approved  of  by  the  Assembly  that  they 
caused  it  to  be  presented  to  both  Houses  of  Parliament.* 
But  in  truth,  as  lias  been  already  suggested,  the  framing 
of  the  Catechism  appears  to  have  been  the  work  of  the  com- 
mittee, and  not  of  any  one  individual  5  and  it  was  brought 
to  its  present  admirable  degree  of  nearness  to  perfection 
by  the  united  deliberations  of  the  whole  Assembly. 

The  chief  matters  on  account  of  which  the  Assembly 
had  been  called  together  being  now  completed,  so  far  as 
depended  on  that  venerable  body  itself,  the  Scottish  com- 
missioners prepared  to  take  their  departure.  This,  indeed, 
had  to  a  certain  extent  already  taken  place,  though  not 
formally.  The  celebrated  Alexander  Henderson  had  been 
sent  to  Newcastle  to  converse  with  the  king,  during  his 
majesty's  residence  along  with  the  Scottish  armj^,  for  the 
purpose  of  endeavoring  to  persuade  him  to  consent  to  such 
terms  as  might  form  the  basis  of  a  satisfactory  and  perma- 
nent peace.  Exhausted  already  with  the  long  continuance 
and  severity  of  his  arduous  public  toils,  and  finding  it  im- 
possible to  make  any  impression  on  the  mind  of  the  infa- 
tuated monarch,  Henderson  left  Newcastle  and  returned  to 
Edinburgh,  where  he  soon  afterwards  died,  leaving  behind 
him  a  reputation  unsurpassed  by  any  man  since  the  days 
of  the  first  reformers.  And  towards  the  close  of  the  year 
164.6,  Baillie  obtained  permission  to  leave  the  Assembly  and 
return  to  Scotland,  that  he  might  communicate  to  the  Com- 
mission of  the  Scottish  General  Assembly  what  had  been 
done  by  the  Westminster  Divines,  preparatory  for  the 
meeting  of  the  Assembly  at  Edinburgh  in  August,  1647, 
when  it  was  expected  that  the  proceedings  of  the  Westmin- 
ster Assembly  would  be  formally  considered  and  approved 
of  by  the  General  Assembly  of  the  Church  of  Scotland,  as 
the  ground  of  the  desired  uniformity  in  religion  between  the 
two  kingdoms.  Gillespie  and  Rutherford  still  remained, 
as  the  Westminster  Assembly  had  been  required  by  the 
Parliament  to  add  Scripture  proofs  to  the  Confession  of 
Faith  ;  but  Gillespie  left  London  in  time  to  be  present  in 
the  General  Assembly,  R\itherford  remaining  a  little  longer. 
It  may  be  stated,  that  the  Assembly  had  intentionally  ab- 
stained from  inserting  texts  of  Scripture  in  the  copy  of  the 
Confession  first  presented  to  Parliament,  not  because  they 
•  Reid's  Lives  of  the  Westminster  Divines,  vol.  ii.  p.  214. 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEiMBLY.  261 

had  themselves  any  difficulty  in  doing  so,  but  to  avoid  giv- 
ing oii'ence  to  the  Parliament,  whose  custom  had  previously 
been,  to  enact  nothing  concerning  religion  on  divine  right, 
or  on  scriptural  grounds.*  This  change  in  the  procedure 
of  the  Parlianient  was  doubtless  intended  to  cause  delay  ; 
but  its  e fleet  was,  the  rendering  of  the  Confession  a  much 
more  perfect  work  than  it  would  otiiervvise  have  been. 

On  the  24-th  of  October,  1()47,  Samuel  Rutherford 
moved,  that  it  might  be  recorded  in  the  books  of  tlie 
scribes,  that  the  Assembly  had  enjoyed  the  assistance  of 
the  honorable,  reverend,  and  learned  commissioners  of  the 
Church  of  Scotland,  during  all  the  time  they  had  been 
debating  and  perfecting  these  four  things  mentioned  in  the 
Covenant,  namely,  a  Director^'  for  Public  Worship,  a  uni- 
form Confession  of  Faith,  a  Form  of  Church  Government 
and  Discipline,  and  a  public  Catechism.  The  Assembly 
assented  unanimously  to  this  motion  ;  and  Mr.  Herle,  the 
prolocutor,  rose  up,  and,  in  the  name  of  the  Assembly, 
returned  thanky  to  the  honorable  and  reverend  commission- 
ers for  their  instance.  He  went  on  to  explain  the  causes 
which  prevented  the  Directory  from  being  so  well  observed 
as  it  ought  to  be,  and  lamented  that  the  Assembly  had  not 
power  to  call  offenders  to  account.  He  further  adverted 
to  the  chaos  of  confusion  in  which  public  aflairs  in  Eng- 
gland  were  continuing,  the  king  having  been  seized  by  the 
army,  and  the  Parliament  being  overawed  by  the  same 
usurping  power  ;  acknowledging  that  their  extraordinary 
successes  hitherto  had  been  granted  in  answer  to  the  pray- 
ers of  their  brethren  of  Scotland,  and  other  Protestants 
abroad,  as  well  as  to  their  owii.t 

The  business  of  the  Assembly  was  now  virtually  at  an 
end.  The  subjects  brought  before  them  by  Parliament  had 
been  all  fully  discussed,  and  the  result  of  their  long  and 
well-matured  deliberations  presented  to  both  Houses  to  be 
approved  or  rejected  by  the  supreme  civil  power  on  its 
own  responsibility.  But  the  Parliament  neither  fully  ap- 
proved nor  rejected  the  Assembly's  productions,  nor  yet 
issued  an  ordinance  for  a  formal  dissolution  of  that  vener- 
able body.  Negotiations  were  still  going  on  with  the 
kino- ;  and  in  one  of  the  papers  which  passed  between  his 
majesty  and  the  Parliament,  he  signified  his  willingness  to 

•  Baillie,  vol.  iii.  p.  2.  t  Neal,  vol.  ii.  p.  431. 


262  HISTORY    OF    THE 

sanction  the  continuation  of  Presbyteiian  Church  g-overn- 
ment  for  three  years;  and  also,  that  the  Assembly  should 
continue  to  sit  and  deliberate,  his  majesty  being  allowed  to 
nominate  twenty  Episcopalian  divines  to  be  added  to  it  for 
the  purpose  of  having  the  whole  subject  of  religion  again 
formally  debated.  To  this  proposal  the  Parliament  refused 
to  consent  ;  but  it  probably  tended  to  prevent  them  from 
formally  dissolving  the  Assembly,  so  long  as  there  remain- 
ed any  shadow  of  hope  that  a  pacific  arrangement  might  be 
effected  wdth  his  majesty. 

In  the  meantime  many  members  of  the  Assembly,  espe- 
cially those  from  the  country,  returned  to  their  own  homes 
and  ordinary  duties;  and  those  who  remained  in  London 
were  chiefly  engaged  in  the  examination  of  such  ministers 
as  presented  themselves  for  ordination,  or  induction  into 
vacant  charges.  They  continued  to  maintain  their  formal 
existence  till  the  22d  of  February,  1649,  about  three  weeks 
after  the  king's  decapitation,  having  sat  five  years,  six 
months,  and  twenty-two  days,  in  w^hich  time  they  had  held 
one  thousand  one  hundred  and  sixty-three  sessions.  They 
were  then  changed  into  a  committee  for  conducting  the 
trial  and  examination  of  ministers,  and  continued  to  hold 
meetinofs  for  this  purpose  every  Thursday  morning  till  the 
25th  of  March,  1652,  when  Oliver  Cromwell  having  forci- 
bly dissolved  the  Long  Parliament,  by  whose  authority  the 
Assembly  had  been  at  first  called  together,  that  committee 
also  broke  up,  and  separated  wdthout  any  formal  dissolu- 
tion, and  as  a  matter  of  necessity. 

As  the  main  object  of  the  Westminster  Assembly  v/as, 
to  frame  such  a  system  of  Church  government  and  public 
worship  as  might  unite  the  kingdoms  of  England,  Scotland, 
and  Ireland,  in  religious  uniformity ;  and  as  the  Assembly 
had  completed  its  task,  the  nexi  point  was  to  lay  the  result 
of  its  labors  before  the  Church  of  Scotland,  that  its  con- 
sent might  be  obtained.  This  was  in  perfect  harmony 
wdlh  the  whole  procedure  of  Scotland  in  this  great  and 
sacred  enterprise.  The  Church  of  Scotland  had  neither 
the  power  nor  the  wish  to  force  its  system  upon  England  ; 
as  little  would  it  have  submitted  to  English  dictation  in  a 
matter  so  important :  and  although  the  English  Parliament 
had  not  fully  ratified  all  the  propositions  of  the  Westmin- 
ster  Assembly,  yet,  since  these  wsre  completed,  the  delay 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBLY.  26 3 

of  Eng-land  was  no  sufficient  reason  why  the  Church  and 
kingdom  of  Scotland  should  also  delay,  if  satisfied  with  the 
system  which  the  Assembly  of  Divines  had  prepared.  Even 
before  the  completion  of  the  Westminster  Assembly's 
labors,  the  Church  of  Scotland  had  shown  its  satisfaction 
and  its  readiness  to  promote  the  desired  uniformity  ;  for,  in 
he  General  Assembly  held  at  Edinburgh  early  in  the  year 
161-5,  an  act  of  Assembly  was  passed  on  the  3d  of  Febru- 
ary, ratifying  the  Directory  of  Public  Worship  ;  and  on  the 
iDlh  of  February  another  act  was  passed,  ratifying  the 
Form  of  Church  Government  and  Ordination,  though  these 
had  not  yet  received  the  full  ratification  of  the  English 
Parliament.  Again,  in  the  General  Assembly  whi(;h  met 
in  August,  164'7,  the  Confession  of  Faith  was  taken  into 
consideration,  copies  having  been  previously  distributed 
throughout  the  Church,  and  was  solemnly  ratified  by  an 
act  of  Assembly  passed  on  the  27th  of  August,  164-7.  The 
Larger  and  Shorter  Catechisms  not  being  ready  at  that 
time,  owing  to  the  delays  which  had  impeded  the  progress 
of  the  Westminster  Divines,  were  not  ratified  till  the  fol- 
lowing year,  when  both  of  them  obtained  the  full  sanction 
of  the  General  Assembly  in  July,  164-8. 

It  may  be  necessary  to  mention,  that  so  jealous  was  the 
Church  of  Scotland  lest  her  sanction  should  be  given  to 
anything  which  bore  an  Erastian  taint,  or  might,  by  per- 
verse ingenuity,  be  so  construed,  that  in  the  act  of  Assembly 
which  ratified  the  Confession  of  Faith,  an  explanation  was 
inserted,  giving  the  Assembly's  understanding  of  some 
parts  of  the  second  article  of  the  thirty-first  chapter,  which 
seemed,  or  might  be  interpreted  to  seem,  to  grant  more 
power  to  the  civil  magistrate  in  the  calling  of  synods  than 
the  Church  of  Scotland  was  prepared  to  admit.  And  still 
more  completely  to  guard  against  the  very  suspicion  of 
any  tincture  of  Erastianism,  the  Assembly  caused  to  be 
printed  a  series  of  propositions,  or  "  Theses  against  Eras- 
tianism," as  Baillie  terms  them,  amounting  to  one  hundred 
and  eleven,  drawn  up  by  George  Gillespie,  embodying  eight 
of  them  in  the  act  which  authorized  their  publication.  It 
is  impossible  to  peruse  these  hundred  and  eleven  proposi- 
tions without  being  thoroughly  convinced,  that  the  General 
Assembly  never  would  have  ratified  the  Confession  of 
Faith  if  they  had  understood  it  to  contain  any  such  Eras* 


264  HISTORY    OF    THE 

tian  taint  as  some  in  modern  times  have  affected  to  dis- 
cover in  It.  Let  the  third  section  of  the  twenty-third  chap- 
ter be  carefully  perused  by  any  intelligent  and  candid  per- 
son, in  connection  with  the  whole  proceedings  of  the 
Assembly  of  Divines  at  Westminster,  and  of  the  General 
Assembly  of  the  Church  of  Scotland,  and  with  the  hundred 
and  eleven  propositions,  and  he  must  conclude  that  it  can- 
not possibly  have  an  Erastian  meaning,  even  though  he 
should  be  unable  to  state  what  it  really  does  mean;  unless, 
indeed,  he  were  to  suppose  that  the  Westminster  Assembly 
and  the  Church  of  Scotland  did  not  understand  the  true 
meaning  of  their  own  propositions.  But  the  truth  appears 
to  be,  that  the  learned  and  able  men  of  that  period  had  so 
thoroughly  studied  and  mastered  the  essential  elements  of 
the  Erastian  controversy,  that  they  could  state  the  propo- 
sitions respecting  the  duty  and  power  of  the  civil  magis- 
trate circa  sacra,  about  religious  matters,  without  admitting 
his  possession  of  any  duty  and  power  in  sacris,  in  religious 
matters,  in  terms  which,  to  their  practised  minds,  marked 
the  boundaries  in  sharp  and  narrow  but  clear  and  definite 
distinctions  ;  while  men  who  have  not  so  deeply  studied 
these  subjects,  and  whose  mental  acumen  has  not  been  so 
much  exercised,  cannot  trace,  and  are  perpetually  crossing, 
these  boundary-lines,  more,  it  may  be,  from  want  of  per- 
spicacity or  knowledge,  than  in  wilful  perverseness.  A  full 
and  clear  history  of  the  Erastian  controversy,  stating  dis- 
tinctly the  great  principles  which  it  involves,  and  their 
bearing  upon  liberty,  civil  and  religious,  would  be  a  work 
of  incalculable  value  at  the  present  time, — that  very  con- 
troversy having  ajrain  begun  to  disturb  men's  minds,  and 
threatening  to  shake  to  pieces  the  most  valuable  institutions, 
if  not  to  overturn  the  entire  structure  of  society. 

Although  the  course  of  events  has  led  to  the  statement 
of  the  Westminster  Assembly's  dissolution,  with  which 
this  narrative  might  close,  yet,  as  its  influence  did  not  at 
once  terminate  with  its  actual  duration,  it  seems  expedient 
to  give  a  brief  outline  of  some  of  the  leading  events  which 
still  retained  its  impress,  till  they  became  almost  indistin- 
guishably  blended  with  the  onward  movements  of  the  na- 
tional mind  and  history.  It  will  be  remembered  that  a  new 
element  was  introduced  into  the  acting  powers  of  the  body 
politic,   when,  by  means  of  the  "  self-denying  ordinance,' 


WKSTMINSTEK     ASSFiMBLY.  265 

members  of  Parliament  were  prohibited   from  holding  any 
post  in  the  army,  and  new  general  officers  were  appointed, 
while  Cromwell  contrived   to  procure  a  special  permission 
for  retaining   his  military  command.     From  that  time  for 
Avard  there  was  a  distinction  of  aims  and  interests  between 
the  Parliament  and  the  army,  although  they  continued  their 
mutual  co-operation  till  the  king's  power  was   laid    pros- 
trate.    In  the  Parliament,  the   Presbyterian  party  retained 
the  ascendency  ;  in   the  army,  the    Independents  appeared 
to  do  so,  although  they  formed  but  one  of  the  many  sects  of 
which  it  was  almost    entirely  composed.     For   some    time 
after  the  kiug  had  taken  up   his   residence  at  Holmby,  the 
disagreement  between   the   Parliament   and   the   army  ap- 
peared only   in  the  shape    of  negotiations  in  the  terms  of 
which  the  two   parties  could   not   agree, — the   Parliament 
wishing  to  disband  a  large  proportion  of  the  troops,  and  to 
send  a  considerable  body  to  Ireland,  to  suppress  the  Popish 
insurrection  in  that  country, — and  the  army  petitioning  for 
au  act  of  indemnity  for  any  illegal  actions  they  might  have 
committed  during* the  war.     This  petition  was  stigmatized 
by  the  Commons  as  of  a  mutinous  tendency,  subjecting  its 
promoters  to  be  proceeded    against  as   disturbers  of   the 
public  peace.     The  army  immediately  formed  a  council  of 
the  principal  officers,  to  deliberate  for  their  own  protection; 
and  to  this  was   added  two  soldiers  out  of  each  company, 
to  assist   the    officers    in  their  council.     To  these  soldiers 
was   given   the    designation,    adjutators^  or  asslsiants  ;  but 
this    somewhat    pedantic  title   very  speedily  degenerated 
into  the  more  intelligible  word,  agitators-, — by  which  name, 
accordingly,    they    are    best    known.     The    disagreement 
continuing,  the  army  seized  possession  of  the   king's  per- 
son, and  marched  towards  London,  declaring    their   inten- 
tion to  new-model  the  government,  as  the  only  method  of 
securing  a  settled  peace  to  the  nation.     Eleven  of  the  lead- 
ing Presbyterian  members  of  the  House  of  Commons  were 
accused    as    guilty  of   high  treason,   and    enemies  of   the 
army,  and,  with  equally  unwise  and  unmanly  terror,  left  the 
House. 

The  city  ©f  London  prepared  to  meet  the  danger, — en- 
rolled the   militia,  threw  up  defences,  and  made    ready  to 
repel  force  by   force.      But  the  Parliament   was  divided. 
The  Speakers  of  both  Houses  favored  the   Independents, 
21 


266  HISTORY    OF    THE 

and  the  absence  of  the  eleven  impeached  members  discou- 
raged their  party.  The  two  Speakers  and  about  sixty-two 
of  the  members  retired  to  the  army.  This  gave  to  that  for- 
midable power  what  it  wanted — the  semblance  of  being 
engaged  in  d  fence  of  the  Legislature  itself — and  with  in- 
creased alacrity  it  advanced  against  the  city.  Strife  and 
confusion  had,  in  the  meantime,  done  their  work.  \\  ithout 
men  of  ability  and  deteimination  to  direct  and  lead  them 
on,  the  citizens  were  unable  to  encounter  a  veteran  army, 
and  London  threw  open  its  gates,  and  submitted  to  a  power, 
formidable  indeed,  but  utterly  unable  to  have  taken  forcible 
possession  of  tlie  city,  had  it  been  boldly  and  vigorously 
defended. 

The  army  having  thus  manifested  its  power,  recoiled  a 
little  and  allowed  the  Parliament  to  continue  to  sit  and 
deliberate,  as  if  still  the  supreme  authority  in  the  nation, 
although  the  king  was  carefully  retained  under  the  super- 
intendence of  the  military  leaders.  At  length  Charles  con- 
trived to  escape  from  Hampton  Court,  with  the  intention 
of  withdrawing  from  the  kingdom,  and  seeking  the  aid  of 
foreign  powers  to  reinstate  him  on  his  throne  ;  but  not 
being  able  to  procure  a  passage,  he  entrusted  himself  to 
Hammond,  governor  of  the  Isle  of  Wight,  by  whom  he 
was  kept  in  Carisbrooke  castle,  in  real  imprisonment, 
though  treated  with  respect.  A  series  of  negotiations  for 
a  treaty  was  resumed  between  the  king  and  the  Parlia- 
ment, which,  like  every  preceding  attempt,  proved  abor- 
tive, in  consequence  of  that  strange  peculiarity  in  his  ma- 
jesty's character,  the  union  of  inflexible  obstinacy  in  one 
point,  with  boundless  and  incurable  dissimulation  in  every 
other.  At  the  very  time  that  the  king  was  treating  with 
the  English  Parliament  for  peace,  he  was  framing  a  pri- 
vate engagement  with  the  Scottish  Royalists,  by  means  of 
which  he  hoped  to  recover  his  power  by  force  of  arms. 
This  led  to  the  march  into  England  of  another  Scottish 
army,  under  the  command  of  the  Duke  of  Hamilton,  who 
had  obtained  a  temporary  ascendency  in  the  Scottish  Par- 
liament, but  against  the  opposition,  and  under  the  protest 
of  the  true  and  faithful  Covenanters.  Cromwell  marched 
against  this  army,  defeated  it,  and  returned  to  London  de- 
termined to  put  an  end  to  the  struggle,  by  putting  to  death 
a   monarch   whose  principles  were  of  the   most   despotic 


WESTMIiNSTER    ASSEMBLY. 


267 


character,  and  upon  whose  most  solemn  treaties  no  re.iance 
could  be  placed.  Again  was  the  Parlinment  subjected  to 
military  force  ;  upwards  of  forty  of  the  Presbyterian  mem- 
bers were  cast  into  confinement  ;  above  one  hundred  and 
sixty  were  excluded  from  the  House  ;  and  none  were  suf- 
fered to  sit  and  deliberate  but  the  most  determined  Secta- 
rians, in  all  not  exceeding  sixiy.  This  violent  invasion  of 
parliamentary  rights  is  commonly  termed  "Pride's  purge," 
from  the  name  of  Colonel  Pride,  the  person  who  com- 
manded the  military  detachment  by  which  it  was  perpe- 
trated ;  and  the  parliamentary  section  which  was  allowed 
to  remain,  is  known  by  the  designation  of  the  Kump  Par- 
liament. 

The  republican  revolution  now  swept  onward  with  great 
rapidity  and  irresistible  force.  It  was  resolved  that  the 
king  should  be  brought  to  trial,  as  guilty  of  treason  against 
the  people  of  England,  before  what  was  termed  a  Court  of 
Justice.  The  House  of  Lords  refused  to  give  their  con- 
sent ;  and  the  Commons  voted  the  concurrence  of  the 
Lords  to  be  unnecessary,  the  people  beiug  the  source  of 
all  just  power.  The  unfortunate  king  was  brought  before 
the  Court  of  Justice,  and  accused  of  treason.  He  de- 
clined their  jurisdiction,  and  defended  himself  with  great 
dignity  and  courage.  But  all  his  defences  were  overruled, 
the  dread  sentence  was  pronounced  ;  and  on  the  30th  of 
January,  164-9,  he  perished  on  the  scaffold,  the  victim  of 
an  inflexible  attachment  to  superstitious  observances  and 
despotic  principles,  aud  of  an  incurable  perseverance  in 
the  arts  of  dissimulation,  yet  in  his  last  moments  display- 
ing a  degree  of  personal  intrepidity,  firmness  of  character, 
and  Christian-like  calmness  and  elevation  of  mind  v/orthy 
of  a  better  cause. 

No  sooner  had  the  tidings  of  the  ill-fated  monarch's 
tragic  end  reached  Sci>tland  than  it  called  forth  a  burst  of 
intense  sorrow  and  indignation  from  the  heart  of  every 
true  Presbyterian  Covenanter  in  the  kingdom.  Arrange- 
ments were  instantly  made  for  placing  the  young  prince 
on  the  Scottish  throne,  and  supporting  him  there  by  force 
of  arms,  if  necessary,  provided  he  would  subscribe  the 
Covenant.  To  this  Charles  was  unwilling  to  consent,  if  he 
could  otherwise  obtain  his  purpose  ;  and  with  this  design 
held  the  Scottish  commissioners  in  terms,  while  conduct* 


268  HISTORY    OF    THE 

in2^  a  private  trea}}^  with  Montrose,  in  the  hope  of  securing 
the  kingdom  by  his  means  without  any  stipulation.  But 
while  in  this  he  showed  proofs  of  hereditary  dissimulation, 
when  Montrose  failed,  he  consented  to  swear  the  Cove- 
nant which  he  never  intended  to  keep,  in  this  respect  com- 
mitting a  crime  darker  far  than  any  with  which  his  father's 
memory  is  chargeable  ;  for  though  Charles  I.  seems  to  have 
regarded  dissimulation  as  allowable  in  diplomacy,  which 
perhaps  statesmen  in  general  may  be  thought  also  to  do, 
he  reverenced  an  oath,  and  w^ould  not  on  any  account  have 
sworn  what  he  did  not  intend  to  perform.  But  Cromwell 
was  not  disposed  to  permit  the  establishment  of  the  royal 
power  in  Scotland,  by  which  his  own  su|)remacy  might  be 
endangered.  He  therefore  marched  northwards  at  the 
head  of  his  veteran  army,  invaded  Scotland,  and  after  a 
series  of  military  movenients,  in  which  he  w^as  fairly 
matched  by  David  Leslie,  he  gained  a  decisive  victory  near 
Dunbar.  The  Scottish  army  rallied  and  took  up  a  strong 
position  near  Stirling  ;  but  their  flank  being  turned,  and 
their  resources  cut  off,  the  young  prince  adopted  the  dar- 
ing enterprise  of  marching  into  England,  hoping  to  be 
joined  by  the  Royalists  in  that  country.  His  hopes  were 
disappointed,  that  party  being  thoroughly  broken  and  dispi- 
rited ;  and  being  overtaken  by  Cromwell,  a  final  struggle 
took  place  at  Worcester,  v/hich  ended  in  the  total  route 
and  dispersion  of  the  royal  army.  After  encountering 
many  perilous  adventures  and  narrow  escapes,  Charles  fled 
to  the  Continent,  and  Cromw^ell  returned  to  London  to  con- 
solidate that  power  in  w^iich  he  had  now  no  rival  but  the 
degraded  Rump  of  the  Long  Parliament.  As  he  no  longer 
needed  the  services  of  that  faction,  he  fostered,  or  at  least 
encouraged  a  quarrel  between  the  army  and  Parliament, 
and  taking  part  w^ith  the  former,  he  hastened  to  the  House 
of  Commons,  assailed  the  astonished  members  with  a  tor- 
rent of  violent  invectives,  ordered  the  mace,  "  that  bauble," 
to  be  taken  away,  called  in  the  military  to  eject  the  dis- 
mayed but  struggling  members,  and  having  locked  the 
door  put  the  key  in  his  pocket,  and  returned  to  Whitehall. 
So  fell  the  English  Parliament  beneath  the  power  of  milita- 
ry usurpation  ;  and  at  the  same  moment  terminated  the 
Westminster  Assembly. 

It  will  be  remembered,  that   London  and  its  immediate 


WESTMIN'STKR    ASSEMBLY.  209 

vicinity  had  been  formed  into  twelve  Presbyteries,  consti- 
mtiiifT  the  Provincial  Synod  of  London.  This  Synod  con- 
tinued to  hold  regular  half-yearly  meetings  till  the  year 
Ui55,  without  encountering  any  direct  obstruction  from 
Cromwell,  but  receiving  no  encouragement.  They  then 
ceased  to  hold  regular  meetings  as  a  Synod,  but  continued 
to  meet  as  Presbyteries,  and  to  maintain,  as  far  as  possi- 
ble, every  other  point  of  Fresbyteiian  Church  government 
and  discipline.  It  is  probable,  or  rather  certain,  that  their 
ceasing  to  act  as  a  Synod  was  caused  by  the  conduct  of 
Cromwell  in  regard  to  religious  matters.  When,  upon  the 
death  of  the  king,  the  government  of  England  was  changed 
to  a  commonwealth,  an  ordinance  was  passed  appointing 
an  engagement  to  be  taken,  first  by  all  civil  and  military 
officers,  and  afterwards  by  all  who  held  official  situations 
in  the  universities  ;  and  at  last  it  was  further  ordered  that 
no  minister  be  capable  of  enjoying  any  preferment  in  the 
Church,  unless  he  should,  within  six  months,  take  the  en- 
gagement publicly  before  the  congregation.  The  conse- 
quence of  this  was,  that  while  the  engagement  was  readily 
taken  by  all  the  Sectarians,  and  by  many  Episcopalians  of 
lax  principles,  it  was  refused  by  great  numbers  of  the 
Presbyterians,  several  of  whom  were  in  a  short  time  eject- 
ed from  the  situations  to  which  they  had  been  appointed 
by  the  Parliament.  Cromwell  and  his  Council,  carrying 
into  full  execution  this  course  of  procedure,  certainly  not 
that  of  loleration^  immediately  placed  Independents  in  the 
situations  thus  rendered  vacant  by  the  ejection  of  the 
Presbyterians,  prohibited  the  publication  of  pamphlets  cen- 
suring the  conduct  of  the  new  government,  and  abolished 
the  monthly  fasts,  which  had  continued  to  be  regularly 
kept  for  about  seven  years,  and  whose  sacred  influence 
had  often  been  deeply  and  beneficially  felt  by  both  Parlia- 
ment and  Assembly.  The  Rev.  Christopher  Love  was  be- 
headed for  being  engaged  in,  or  cognisant  of,  a  correspon- 
dence with  Scotland  for  the  purpose  of  supporting  the  in- 
terests of  Charles  IL  Not  long  afterwards,  in  the  year 
11)54-,  an  ordinance  of  council  was  issued,  appointing  a 
new  committee  of  thirty-eight  persons,  nine  of  whom  were 
laymen,  to  examine  and  approve  all  who  should  be  pre« 
sented,  nominated,  chosen,  or  appointed  to  any  benefice 
with  cure  of  souls,  or  to  any  public  settled  lecture  in  Eng« 
23* 


270  HISTORY    OF    THE 

land  or  "Wales.  Of  this  new  committee,  commonly  called 
Triers,  some  were  Presbj^terians,  a  large  proportion  Inde- 
pendents, and  a  few  were  Baptists.  Any  five  were  suffi- 
cient to  approve  ;  but  no  number  under  nine  had  power  to 
reject  a  person  as  unqualified.  In  this  manner,  although 
the  Presbyterian  Church  government  was  not  formally 
abolished  by  Cromwell,  its  power  was  transferred  to  the 
hands  of  the  committee  of  Triers,  and  consequently  the 
Synods  ceased  to  hold  meetings  which  could  no  longer 
exercise  ary  authority.  This  committee  continued  to  ex- 
ercise its  functions  till  the  Protector's  death  in  1659,  when 
it  was  discontinued. 

Another  ordinance  appointed  commissioners,  chiefly 
laymen,  for  every  county,  with  power  to  eject  scandalous 
ignorant,  and  insufficient  ministers  and  schoolmasters 
This  also  superseded  the  previous  arrangements  which 
had  been  made  by  the  Long  Parliament  for  a  similar  pur 
pose,  and  tended  to  bring  every  ecclesiastical  matter  under 
the  direct  control  of  the  civil  power,  and  in  a  great  mea- 
sure under  the  superintendence  of  the  Protector  himself 
and  his  council.  By  this  ordinance,  as  well  as  by  that  of 
the  Parliament,  it  was  appointed  that  ample  time  should 
be  allowed  to  the  ejected  person  for  his  removal,  and  the 
fifths  of  the  benefice  were  reserved  for  the  support  of  his 
family.  When  the  Prelatic  party  silenced  and  deposed 
the  Puritans  and  Nonconformists  of  other  days,  no  such 
generosity  was  shown  to  them  or  their  families,  but  nei- 
ther the  Presbyterians  nor  the  Independents  were  so  for- 
getful of  the  principles  of  Christianity  as  to  requite  evil 
with  evil,  but  showed  kindness  to  their  former  calumniators 
and  oppressors. 

The  Independents  were  now  raised  to  the  enjoyment  of 
a  large  measure  of  power  and  favor,  though  the  Protector 
.managed  to  reserve  to  himself  the  reality  without  the 
name  of  ecclesiastical  supremacy.  They  felt  accordingly 
that  they  might  now  safely  adopt  a  course  on  which  noth- 
ing had  hitherto  been  able  to  induce  them  to  enter, — the 
preparation,  namely,  of  some  public  document  of  the  na- 
ture of  a  Confession  of  Faith.  To  this  they  had  been 
often  urged  by  the  Westminster  Assembly,  but  in  vain. 
They  were  aware  that  a  full  and  explicit  statement  of  their 
principles  would   deprive  them  of  the   support  of  a  large 


WESTMINSTER   ASSEMBLY.  Sl^l 

proportion  of  the  numerous  sects  who  viewed  them  as  the 
leading  Sectarian  party,  and  might  thereby  so  reduce  their 
influence  as  to  render  their  hopes  of  promoting  their  own 
system  exceedingly  feeble.  But  the  Presbyterians  were 
now  depressed  and  overborne  ;  some  of  the  most  danger- 
ous of  tile  sects  had  been  forcibly  suppressed,  such  as  the 
Levellers,  Fifth  Monarchy  men,  &c. ;  and  they  might  new 
promulgate  their  own  views  without  incurring  the  danger 
of  losing  valuable  adherents.  Some  of  the  leading  men 
among  them  accordingly  met  in  London,  and  having 
agreed  upon  the  propriety  of  framing  a  Confession  of 
Faith,  as  had  been  done  by  other  Churches,  they  requested 
permission  from  the  Protector  to  hold  an  Assembly  for 
that  purpose.  This  was  granted  with  some  reluctance, 
and  tbeir  Assembly  was  appointed  to  meet  at  the  Savoy, 
on  the  12th  of  October,  1658. 

They  opened  their  meeting  with  a  day  of  fasting  and 
prayer  5  and  after  some  deliberation,  resolved  to  keep  as 
near  as  possible  to  the  method  and  order  of  the  Westmin- 
ster Assembly's  Confession  of  Faith,  in  framing  a  similar 
document  for  themselves.  A  committee  was  chosen  to 
prepare  the  outline,  consisting  of  Brs.  Goodwin  and  Owen, 
Messrs.  Nye,  Bridge,  Caryl,  and  Greenhill.  In  the  short 
period  of  about  eleven  or  twelve  days  they  finished  their 
work,  which  was  soon  afterwards  published  under  the  title 
of  "  A  Declaration  of  the  Faith  and  Order  owned  and  prac- 
tised in  the  Congregational  Churches  in  England,  agreed 
upon  and  consented  unto  by  their  elders  and  messengers 
in  their  meeting  at  the  Savoy."  The  speed  with  which 
they  completed  their  task  contrasts  very  strongly  with  the 
manner  in  which  they  contrived  to  retard  the  progress  of 
the  Westminster  Assembly,  but  may  be  readily  explained. 
They  followed  the  Assembly's  Confession  very  closely,  to 
which  indeed  their  leading  men  had  already  assented  ; 
they  omitted  all  the  chapters  which  relate  to  discipline, 
thus  avoiding  the  discussion  of  disputed  topics;  and  they 
had  now  no  object  to  serve  by  delay,  but  many  a  motive 
to  induce  them  to  make  haste.  At  the  end  of  their  work 
there  is  a  chapter  of  discipline,  consisting  of  five  sections, 
and  giving  a  brief  statement  and  assertion  of  the  main 
points  in  which  their  system  differed  from  that  of  the 
Presbyterians,  respecting  the  power   of  single   congrega* 


272  HISTORY    OF    THE 

tions,  the  method  of  ordination,  the  admini-strution  of  the 
sacraments,  the  use  of  Synods  and  Assemblies  to  consult 
and  advise  but  without  authority,  and  occasional  commu- 
nion with  other  Churches.*  This  Savoy  Confession,  as  it 
is  commonly  called,  never  acquired  any  importance  in  the 
community,  and  did  not  supersede  the  Assembly's  Confes- 
sion of  Faith  even  in  the  estimation  of  a  large  proportion 
of  the  Independents  themselves  ;  and  as  Cromwell,  the 
great  supporter  of  the  Independent  party,  died  very  soon 
after  its  production,  on  the  3d  of  September,  1658,  it  never 
received  his  public  sanction. 

Upon  the  death  of  Cromwell,  he  was  succeeded  by  his 
son  Richard,  a  man  of  an  amiable  character,  but  utterly 
unfit  to  conduct  the  government  of  the  country  in  such  a 
time  of  storm  and  peril.  A  plot  w^as  formed  against  him 
by  a  part  of  the  army,  headed  by  Fleetwood  and  Desbo- 
rough,  to  whom  the  leading  Independent  divines,  especially 
Dr.  Owen  and  Mr.  Nye,  lent  their  ready  assistance.  Rich- 
ard was  persuaded  to  dissolve  the  Parliament ;  Fleetwood 
and  Desborough,  and  their  party,  immediately  summoned 
the  Rump  of  the  Long  Parliament  to  re-assemble,  and  Rich- 
ard, seeing  it  impossible  to  maintain  his  power  without 
another  civil  war,  and  being  destitute  of  military  talents, 
resolved  to  abdicate  his  authority,  and  retire  to  private 
life.  A  new  series  of  dark  intrigues  followed,  in  which 
General  Monk  acted  a  prominent  part,  the  issue  of  which 
was,  the  restoration  of  Charles  II.  on  the  29th  of  May,  1660. 
In  consequence  of  the  mutual  jealousies  of  the  various  par- 
ties, the  king  was  restored  without  conditions  of  any  kind, 
and  thus  the  liberties,  both  civil  and  religious,  of  the  king- 
dom, in  defence  of  which  so  much  blood  had  been  shed, 
and  so  many  miseries  endured,  were  laid  at  his  feet.  The 
Prelatic  hierarchy  w.ere  immediately  restored  to  the  pos- 
session of  all  their  rank,  wealth,  and  power,  and  speedily 
proved  that  the  persecuting  spirit  of  Prelacy  had  sustained 
no  abatement. 

For  a  short  time  the  king  affected  to  treat  the  Presbyte- 
rian ministers  with  respect  and  kindness  ;  and  they  were 
encouraged  to  hope,  that  although  Prelacy  was  restored 
to  its  former  supremacy,  yet  some  modification  of  it  might 
be  made  to  which  it  might  be  possible  to  conform.  Aftei 
*  Neal,  vol.   i.  pp.  690-692. 


WESTMINSTER    ASSFMBT.Y.  273 

Fome  consultation  amon^  themselves,  they  presented  to 
his  majesty  a  petition  expressing  their  desires  for  such 
alterations  as  might  lead  to  an  accommodation  and  agree- 
ment in  an  amended  and  modified  Episcopacy.  This  peti- 
tion was  communicated  to  the  Prelates,  who  returned  such 
an  answer  as  greatly  to  obscure  all  prospect  of  any  accom- 
modation. But  as  matters  were  not  yet  ripe  for  what  was 
intended,  the  king  issued  a  declaration  concerning  eccle- 
siastical attairs,  containing  so  mat»y  plausible  statements, 
that  the  hopes  of  the  Presbyterians  were  somewhat  revived. 
At  length  it  was  arranged  that  a  conference  should  be  held 
at  the  Savoy  between  twelve  bishops  and  nine  assistants  on 
the  part  of  the  Episcopalian  Church,  and  an  equal  number 
of  ministers  on  the  part  of  the  Presbyterians.  The  first 
meeting  of  this  conference  took  place  on  the  15th  of  April, 
1661,  and  it  was  continued,  with  intermissions,  till  the  2r)th 
of  July,  when  it  expired  without  producing  the  slightest 
approximation  towards  an  agreement,  the  bishops  refusing 
to  make  any  alterations  in  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  to 
which  their  discussions  were  limited,  or  to  make  any  con- 
cession to  the  conscientious  scruples,  or  more  grave  and 
solid  arguments  of  the  Presbyterian  ministers.* 

A  convocation  was  held  soon  after  the  termination  of  the 
conference,  in  which  a  few  alterations  were  made  in  the 
Prayer-Book,  not  all  for  the  better  ;  and  the  proceedings  of 
the  convocation  were  ratified  by  both  Houses  of  Parliament. 

It  now  remained  to  enforce  the  Prelatic  system  by  the 
strong  hand  of  legislative  power.  This  was  done  by  the 
Act  of  Uniformity,  which,  after  passing  both  Houses,  by 
small  majorities,  received  the  royal  assent  on  the  19th  of 
May,  1662,  and  was  to  take  effect  from  the  24th  of  August 
following.  The  terms  of  conformity  specified  by  this  act 
were:  1.  Re-ordination,  if  they  had  not  been  episcopally 
ordained.  2.  A  declaration  of  unfeigned  assent  and  con- 
sent to  all  and  everything  prescribed  and  contained  in  the 
Book  of  Common  Prayer,  and  administration  of  sacraments 
and  other  rites  and  ceremonies  of  the  Church  of  England, 
together  with  the  psalter,  and  the  form  and  manner  of 
making,  ordaining,  and  consecrating  of  bishops,  priests, 
and  deacons.     3.  To  take  the  oath  of  canonical  obedience. 

•  For  a  full  account  of  this  Conference,  see  History  of  iVon-Confor. 
mit^,  Life  of  Baxter,  &c. 


274  HISTORY  OF  THE 

4.  To  abjure  the  Solemn  League  and  CcTenant.  5.  To 
abjure  the  lawfulness  of  taking  arms  against  the  kino-,  or 
any  commissioned  by  him,  on  any  pretence  whatsoever. 
Such  were  the  terms  of  the  infamous  and  tyrannical  Act 
of  Uniformity,  which  was  to  come  into  force  on  what  is 
termed  the  feast  of  St.  Bartholomew  ;  and  the  penalty  for 
any  one  who  should  refuse,  was  deprivation  of  all  his  spi- 
ritual promotions.  The  result  was,  that  when  the  fatal  St. 
Bartholomew^'s  day  arrived,  about  two  thousand  Presbyte- 
rians relinquished  all  their  ecclesiastical  preferments, 
abandoned  all  their  worldly  means  of  subsistence,  left  their 
homes,  and,  m.ore  painful  than  all,  their  churches  and  their 
weeping  and  heart-stricken  flocks,  and  became  literally 
strangers  and  pilgrims  in  their  native  country,  like  their 
Divine  Master,  not  having  where  to  lay  their  heads.  In 
their  day  of  power,  when  ejecting  Episcopalian  ministers 
convicted  of  scandalous  offences  or  of  ignorance,  they  had 
allowed  to  these  men  a  fifth  part  of  their  former  livings  ; 
but  no  similar  mercy  or  charity  was  shown  to  them.  They 
were  at  once  driven  and  abandoned  to  utter  poverty  and 
homelessness  ;  and  to  grievous  wrong  was  added  not  less 
grievous  insult  in  the  cruel  and  contumelious  treatment 
which  they  received  from  their  proud  and  pitiless  oppres- 
sors. Yet  in  one  respect  the  day  of  St.  Bartholomew^  was 
a  glorious  day.  It  testified  to  a  wondering  world  the 
strength  and  the  integrity  of  Presbyterian  principles,  in  their 
triumph  over  every  earthly  influence  ;  or  rather,  let  us  say, 
it  proved  that  the  essential  spirit  of  the  Presbyterian  Church 
is  the  spirit  of  Christianity  itself,  and  therefore  it  received 
Divine  strength  in  the  day  of  sore  trial,  that  it  might  finish 
its  testimony  in  behalf  of  the  sole  sovereignty  of  Christ 
over  his  own  spiritual  kingdom,  to  the  laws  and  institutions 
of  w^hich  man  has  no  right  to  add,  and  which  he  cannot 
without  sin  diminish  Yes,  for  the  Presbyterian  Church, 
and  even  for  the  Westminster  Assembly  by  which  that 
Church  had  been  introduced  into  England,  it  was  a  rrlori- 
ous  day  ;  but  what  was  it  for  Prelacy  1  A  day  of  everlast- 
ing infamy,  stamping  upon  its  character  indelibly  the  fact- 
proved  charge  of  being  essentially  a  PERSECUT1^:G  systf.m. 

But  it  is  equally  unnecessary  and  ungracious  to  dwell  on 
the  detailed  results  of  this  tyrannical  and  persecuting  act  ; 
and  therefore,  with  a  few  incidental  remarks  of  some  ffene- 


V.'ESTHINSTKU    ASSE.'MBLV.  275 

ral  im})ortance,  we  shall  pass  from  tiie  painful  subject,  [t 
must  have  been  observed,  that  the  religious  body  once 
known  by  the  name  of  Puritans,  l»ecame  Presbyterians  both 
in  principles  and  practice,  partly  before,  and  thoroug-hly 
during  the  time  of  the  Westminster  Assembly.  Against 
them,  accordingly,  as  Presbyterians,  was  the  force  of  perse- 
cution directed,  although  the  demands  and  the  penalties  of 
the  Act  of  Uniformity  were  equally  applicable  to  the  Inde- 
pendents and  all  other  sects  of  Dissenters  ;  and  of  the 
whole  two  thousand  who  were  ejected  by  that  act,  above 
nine-tenths  were  Presbyterians.  The  Independents  did 
not,  at  that  time,  number  more  than  an  hundred  churches 
in  their  communion  ;  the  Baptists  were  still  fewer  ;  and  of 
the  other  sects,  the  greater  part  had  only  those  lay  preach- 
ers who  had  sprung  up  during  the  enthusiastic  times  of  the 
civil  war.  Of  the  divines  who  had  constituted  the  West- 
minster Assembly,  not  more  than  six,  or,  in  strict  propriety, 
only  four,  conformed.  About  thirty  of  them  were  dead 
before  the  act  came  into  operation,  some  of  them  very  close 
upon  the  time,  and  one  or  two  almost  immediately  after 
preaching  what  would  have.proved  by  persecution,  as  they 
did  by  death,  their  farewell  sermons.  The  names  of  the  six 
who  are  stated  to  have  conformed  were,  l)rs.  Conant,  Wallis, 
Reynolds,  and  Lightfoot,  and  Messrs.  Heyri«h  and  Hodges. 
But  of  these  Dr.  Conant  at  first  refused  to  conform,  was 
ejected,  and  continued  so  for  a  period  of  eight  years,  when 
tlie  persuasion  of  relatives  prevailed  on  him  to  comply,  and 
he  was  appointed  to  a  ministerial  charge  in  Northampton, 
nnd  subsequently  obtained  other  preferments;  and  Dr. 
Wallis,  who  had  been  one  of  the  scribes  to  the  Westmin- 
ster Assembly,  was  made  Savilian  Professor  of  Geometry 
at  Oxford,  in  the  year  1649 — an  office  which  in  a  great 
measure  excluded  him  from  ecclesiastical  affairs,  and  ren- 
dered the  act  of  conformity  to  him  little  different  from  a 
university  qualification.  It  thus  appears,  that  almost  the 
entire  surviving  members  of  the  Westminster  Assemblv 
gave  to  the  principles  which  they  had  then  declared  and 
advocated  the  strong  and  clear  testimony  of  suffering  in 
their  defence. 

Having  now  stated  all  the  leading  events  connected 
with,  and  resulting  from,  the  Westminster  Assembly,  we 
might  here  conclude  ;   but  in  order  to  obtain  as  clear  and 


276  HISTORY   OF  THE 

comprehensive  a  conception  of  the  whole  subject  as  possv 
ble,  it  seems  expedient  to  retrace,  for  the  purpose  of  com- 
bining in  one  view  its  leading  principles,  characteristics, 
endeavors,  and  intentions,  offering  some  remarks  explana- 
tory of  their  nature,  showing  how  far  they  were  success- 
ful, or  by  what  and  to  what  extent  obstructed,  what  actual 
impress  they  gave  to  the  form  of  society,  or  what  vital 
elements  they  infused  into  its  heart,  and  how  far  the  great 
objects  which  they  sought  to  attain  may  yet  be  susceptible 
of  resuscitation  and  accomplishment. 

It  has  been  already  shown,  by  a  series  of  historical 
deductions,  that  the  principle  of  the  sovereign's  supremacy 
in  ecclesia^stical  matters,  conjoined  with  the  encroaching 
and  domineering  spirit  of  Prelacy,  had  so  nearly  subverted 
all  liberty,  civil  and  religious,  that  it  became  t'he  impera- 
tive duty  of  every  Christian  and  every  patriot  to  unite  in 
resisting  the  cruel  and  degrading  thraldom  with  which  the 
kingdom  was  threatened.  To  that  subject  it  is  not  neces- 
sary again  to  direct  our  attention.  Nor  need  we  do  more 
than  simply  refer  to  the  important  fact,  that  the  main  pur- 
pose for  which  the  Westminster  Assembly  was  called  toge- 
ther, and  the  Solemn  League  and  Covenant  was  framed,  was 
to  produce,  so  far  as  might  be  practicable,  unity  of  religious 
belief  and  uniformity  in  Church  government  throughout 
England,  Scotland,  and  Ireland.  Even  for  the  sake  of  pro- 
curing and  maintaining  peace  among  the  nations  compos- 
ing the  one  British  empire,  such  an  uniformity  was  re- 
garded as  almost  indispensable.  For,  as  the  Scottish  com- 
missioners reasoned,  there  is  "nothing  so  powerful  to 
divide  the  hearts  of  people  as  division  in  religion  ;  nothing 
so  strong  to  unite  them  as  unity  in  religion."  The  same 
idea  was  entertained  by  both  James  VI.  and  his  son  Charles 
I.,  and  both  of  them  sought  to  realize  it  by  imposing  the 
English  system  on  the  Church  and  people  of  Scotland,  the 
one  by  fraud  and  the  other  by  force.  As  might  have  been 
expected,  neither  of  them  was  successful ;  but  the  attempt 
to  realize  the  idea  by  such  methods,  both  showed  its  im- 
portance, and  placed  it  in  a  clearer  hght,  as  related  to  the 
two  kingdoms  of  England  and  Scotland.  The  people  of 
Scotland  loved  their  Church  devotedly,  not  only  on  account 
of  its  purity  of  doctrine  and  scriptural  simplicity  of  form, 
but  also  because  by   its  means  alone  had  they  acquired  a 


WESTIMINSTER     A^SKMBLV.  277 

partial  release  from  that  feudal  thraldom  in  which  they  had 
previously  been  held  by  their  haughty  and  oppressive 
nobles.  And  they  were  compelled  to  see  that  their  belov- 
ed Church  would  never  be  safe  from  the  aggressions  of 
Prelacy  so  long  as  the  prelalic  form  of  Churcirgovernnicnt 
prevailed  in  England.  On  the  other  hand,  the  oppressive, 
persecuting,  and  despotic  conduct  of  Prelacy,  in  its  treat- 
ment of  the  Puritans,  and  in  the  aid  which  it  so  willingly  lent 
the  sovereign  in  his  invasions  of  civil  liberty,  had  at  length 
aroused  the  strong  and  free  spirit  of  England,  which  deter- 
mined to  shake  off  the  prelatic  yoke,  and  to  make  such 
alterations  as  should  render  its  future  re-imposi*tion  im- 
possible. Such  a  concurrence  of  sentiment  and  feeling 
between  the  two  nations  held  out  the  prospect  that  at  least 
an  approach  to  uniformity  of  religion  might  now  be  ob- 
tained, such  as  would  form  the  only  sure  basis  of  a  tho- 
rough and  permanent  national  peace, — and  that,  too,  not 
by  one  of  the  two  dictating  to  the  olher,  but  in  the  only 
way  by  which  real  uniformity  can  ever  be  effected,  by  mu- 
tual consultation  and  consent. 

Such  were  the  enlarged,  free,  and  generous  views  which 
led  to  the  calling  of  the  Westminster  Assembly,  and  the 
framing  of  the  Solemn  League  and  Covenant — such,  in  an 
especial  manner,  were  the  views  entertained  by  the  Scot- 
tish Covenanters,  both  statesmen  and  divines,  as  is  proved 
by  that  remarkably  able  paper  presented  by  them  to  the 
English  Parliament  in  the  year  1641.  It  is,  however,  a 
painful  truth,  that  these  elevated  ideas  were  not  received 
and  held  with  equal  fulness,  sincerity,  and  perseverance,  by 
a  large  proportion  of  the  English  statesmen  ;  and  this  de- 
fectiveness on  their  part  allowed  the  remaining  existence 
and  the  subsequent  growth  and  development  of  those  dis- 
turbing influences,  which  at  length  prevented  the  grand 
object  from  being  fully  realized.  In  England  the  struggle 
was  chiefly  in  defence  of  civil  rights  and  privileges,  involv- 
ing also,  though  somewhat  less  directly,  the  still  more  im- 
portant element  of  religious  liberty.  Hence  the  ordinary 
secular  opinions  and  feelings  that  mould  the  course  of  hu- 
man action,  were  allowed  to  have  almost  full  scope,  and 
produced  their  common  narrowing  and  self-seeking  influ- 
ence. Had  not  this  been  the  case,  Erastianism  would  not 
have  characterized  so  stronffly  the  conduct  of  the  English 
24> 


2,78  HISTORY    OF    THE 

Parliament,  exercising  a  power  so  baneful  in  impeding  Ine 
final  settlement  of  the  desired  religious  uniformity,  involv- 
ing the  nation  in  protracted  anarchy,  and  exposing  the 
cause  of  freedom  to  the  crushing  grasp  of  military  usurpa- 
tion. There  might  be  traced,  did  our  limits  allow  it,  a  very 
close  connection  between  the  development  of  Erastian 
principles  in  the  Parliament,  and  the  successive  disasters 
which  befel  them  through  the  insubordination  of  the  army 
in  its  growing  republicanism — so  close,  that  the  latter 
would  almost  seem  like  the  direct  infliction  of  retributive 
justice  upon  the  former,  ending  in  the  completed  guilt  and 
the  final  overthrow  of  the  Parliament  being  almost  simul- 
taneous. 

The  advantage  which  would  arise  to  Christendom  from 
the  existence  of  something  approaching  to  a  general  reli- 
gious uniformity  must  be  apparent  to  every  reflecting  mind, 
both  as  a  general  homage  to  the  certainties  of  revealed 
truth,  and  as  itself  the  master  element  of  general  harmony 
and  peace.  But  it  is  contrary  alike  to  the  nature  of  reli- 
gion, and  to  the  constitution  of  the  human  mind,  to  suppose 
that  this  desirable  object  can  be  obtained  by  compulsion. 
Open,  candid,  brotherlike  consultation  may  do  much,  when 
Christian  men  fairly  and  honestly  wish  to  arrive  at  as  ".lose 
a  degree  of  uniformity  in  doctrine,  worship,  and  govern- 
ment, as  can  be  attained,  with  due  respect  to  liberty  and 
integrity  of  conscience.  It  was  for  this  very  purpose  that 
the  Westminster  Assembly  was  called,  and  that  Scottish 
divines  were  requested  to  be  present  at  and  aid  in  its  deli- 
berations. This  was  right,  and  bore  fair  prospect  and  pro- 
mise of  o-ood ;  but  mutual  jealousies  and  rivalries  arose; 
men  misjudged  and  misinterpreted  each  other's  intentions; 
and  the  intrigues  of  mere  worldly  politicians  intermin- 
gled with,  biassed  and  baffled  far  higher  and  holier  objects 
than  those  with  which  such  men  are  usually  conversant. 
Probably  the  two  parties  of  a  religious  character  (we  speak 
not  now  of  mere  Erastians),  of  whom  the  Assembly  was 
composed,  the  Presbyterians  and  the  Independents,  were 
both  in  error ;  probably  they  both  entertained  narrower 
conceptions  of  the  nature  of  religious  uniformity,  and  also 
of  religious  toleration  and  liberty,  than  the  terms,  rightly 
undersitood,  imply.  Uniformity  is  not  necessarily  absolute 
identity.     Neither  of  these  two  parties  held  that  absolute 


WESTMINSTRR    ASSEIMBLY.  279 

identity  was  necessary,  as  appears  from  their  respective 
writings;  but  each  of  them  dreaded  that  nothing-  less  than 
absolute  identity  would  satisfy  the  other,  and  to  that  nei- 
ther of  them  could  agree.  And  this  misapprehension  was 
enough,  not  only  to  prevent  the  accomplishment  of  the 
purpose  for  which  they  met,  but  even  to  act  as  a  wedge, 
rending  them  daily  more  widely  and  hopelessly  asunder. 

Yet  in  spite  of  this  unpropitious  misapprehension,  a  very 
considerable  amount  of  religious  uniformity  was  produced. 
The  Independents  expressed  no  dissent  from  the  Confes- 
sion of  Faith  and  the  Directory  of  Worship  prepared  by 
the  Assembly.  All  the  Puritan  nonconformists  received 
these  documents  with  cordial  approbation.  Parliament 
gave  to  their  most  important  principles  and  arrangements 
its  legislative  sanction,  and  England  was  on  the  very  point 
of  being  favored  with  the  establishment  of  a  Presbyterian 
Church.  So  far  did  this  proceed,  that  at  first  the  Univer- 
sity of  Cambridge,  and  afterwards  that  of  Oxford,  were 
new-modelled,  and  the  professorships  given  to  Presbyterian 
divines.  Prelatic  writers  have  been  in  the  habit  of  repre- 
senting this  change  as  barbarising  these  universities.  To 
refute  such  calumny,  nothing  more  is  necessary  than  to 
name  the  men  on  whom  these  academic  appointments  were 
conferred — men  than  whom  none  more  eminent  for  learn- 
ing, abilities,  and  true  piety,  ever  graced  the  universities 
of  any  age  or  country.  But  something  still  more  striking 
may  be  said  in  answer  to  prelatic  calumny.  Not  only  did 
the  new  professors  ably  sustain  the  reputation  of  the  Eng- 
lish universities,  they  also  infused  into  them  a  spirit  of  free- 
dom, originality,  and  energy  of  thought,  which  burst  forth 
in  the  manhood  of  the  men  trained  under  their  care,  with 
a  degree  of  power  and  splendor  that  has  scarcely  been 
ever  equalled,  much  less  surpassed.  In  proof  of  this,  it  is 
enough  to  mention  the  names  of  Locke,  Boyle,  Newton, 
Tillotson,  Stillingfleet,  Cave,  Whitby,  South,  and  many 
others.  In  short,  the  Presbyterian  dynasty  of  the  univer- 
sities infused  into  them  new  life,  the  vigorous  tone  and 
movements  of  vvhich  were  not  exhausted  till  the  lapse  of 
two  o-enerations. 

Closely  associated  with  the  subject  of  imiversity  learn- 
ing is  that  of  eminence  in  theological  acquirements,  and 
pulpit  oratory.     On  this  point  also  a  very  prevalent  fallacy 


280  HISTORY    OF    THE 

exists,  and  is  repeated  and  believed  without  inquiry.  It  is 
very  common  to  meet  with  extravagant  praises  bestowed 
upon  the  eminent  learning  and  the  valuable  theologica. 
works  produced  by  the  Church  of  England  ;  but  it  seems 
to  be  generally  forgotten,  that  by  far  the  largest  and  most 
precious  portion  of  English  theological  literature  was  com- 
posed either  by  the  Puritan  divines,  or  by  the  Presbyte- 
rians of  the  Westminster  Assembly,  or  by  the  generation 
which  was  trained  up  under  them  in  the  universities,  [f 
all  the  worksproduced  by  these  men  were  carefully  marked 
and  set  aside,  and  the  works  of  none  but  the  genuine  Pre- 
latists  were  ascribed  to  the  Church  of  England,  her  renown 
for  theological  literature  w^ould  be  shorn  of  its  beams  in- 
deed. It  is  not  denied  that  the  Church  of  England  has 
contributed  many  valuable  additions  to  the  literature  of 
Christianity  ;  and  considering  the  ample  means  at  her  com- 
mand for  bestowing  on  her  office-bearers  extensive  educa- 
tion and  literary  leisure,  it  would  have  been  strange  if  she 
had  not.  But  it  is  not  the  less  true,  that  a  very  large 
share  of  her  reputation  is  derived  from  the  writings  of  the 
Puritan  and  Presbyterian  divines,  and  their  immediate  pu- 
pils,— from  the  very  men  whom  she  calumniated  and  perse- 
cuted, and  strove  to  ex'erminate  when  living,  and  when 
dead,  has  pillaged  of  their  hard-won  honors,  which  she 
arrogates  for  her  own,  or  suffers  to  be  ascribed  to  her  by 
unwise  or  unblushing  flatterers. 

Not  only  was  an  impulse  given  to  the  universities  during 
the  short  prevalence  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  in  Eng- 
land, but  also  throughout  considerable  districts  of  the 
kingdom.  Strenuous  exertions  were  made  to  provide  an 
adequate  remedy  for  the  deplorable  state  of  ignorance  in 
which  the  great  body  of  the  population  had  been  suffered 
to  remain.  The  removal  of  scandalous  and  ignorant  min- 
isters was  the  first  step  taken  towards  this  desirable  ob- 
ject. Another  was  the  sequestration  of  the  surplus  wealth 
of  the  Prelatic  dignitaries  ;  a  portion  of  which  it  was  in- 
tended to  employ  in  providing  academies,  schools,  and  all 
that  was  necessary  for  instituting  a  national  system  of 
education.  This  noble  and  generous  scheme  also  was  em- 
barrassed and  impeded  by  Erastian  interference  ;  because 
it  would  have  naturally  fallen  under  the  superintendence 
of  Presbyteries,  to  the    erection  of  which   throughout  the 


AVESTMI?isTi:R    ASSF.iMBLY. 


281 


kingdc-nn,  with  full  and  due  powers,  they  could  not  be  per- 
suaded to  consent.  Even  when  almost  paralyzed  by  this 
unhappy  Krastian  interference,  the  Presbyterian  ministers 
set  themselves  to  promote  education  to  the  utmost  ol  their 
power.  There  may  still  be  found,  in  several  country  dis- 
tricts in  England,  where  Presbyterians  once  abounded, 
schools  having  a  right  to  a  small  salary  to  the  schoolmas- 
ter, on  condition  that  he  should  teach  the  children  the  As- 
sembly's Shorter  Catechism.*  The  people  of  England  do 
not  yet  know,  and  cannot  easily  conceive,  how  grievous 
wasthe  loss  which  they  sus'tained  by  the  unfortunate  failure 
of  the  attempt  to  rende.r  the  Presbyterian  Church  the 
ecclesiastical  establishmen.t  of  the  kingdom.  To  them  it 
would  have  been  a  s-ource  of  almost  unmingled  and  in.cal- 
culabic  good,  giving  to  them  the  advantage  of  an  evangeli- 
cal, pious,  laborious,  and  regularly  resident  minister  in 
every  parish,  together  with  cheap  and  universally  accessi- 
ble educati'on,  the  constant  inspection  of  elders  to  watch 
over  their  moral  conduct,  and  deacon-s  to  attend  to  the 
wants  of  the  poor  i-n  the  spirit  of  Christian  kindness  and 
benevolence;  all  regulated  by  the  superintendence  of  Pres- 
byteries and  Synods,  to  prevent  the  hazard  of  injury  from 
local  neglect  or  prejudice.  And  surely  a  truly  ^vise  and 
paternalGovernment  ought  to  have  rejoiced  at  the  oppor- 
tunity of  attaining  so  easily  advantages  so  inestimable  to 
the  nation  at  large,  and  consequently  to  its  rulers,  and  to 
all  that  wished  its  welfare.  All  this  was  once  attainable, 
— was  very  nearly  attained;  has  it  become  for  ever  impos- 
sible 1     We  will  not  think  so  ;  a  time  may  come. 

Reference  has  been  repeatedly  made  to  the  state  of  the 
army,  and  of  the  almost  innumerable  varieties  of  sects 
which  appeared  in  it,  and  throughout  the  kingdom  ;  and  it 
has  been  shown  that  this  strange  and  formidable  chaos  of 
relioious  opinions  can  best  be  accounted  for  by  attending 
to  the  fact,  that  almost  the  entire  population  had  been  al- 
lowed, or  rather  constrained,  to  remain  in  a  state  of  deplo- 
rable ignorance,  by  the  wretched  policy  of  the  Prelatists 
and  of  the  despotic  monarchs,  who  deemed  it  inexpedient 
to  teach  the  people  to  think,  lest  they  should  turn  their 
•  One  of  these  the  author  was  fortunate  enough  to  assist  in  rescuing 
from  thor  nands  of  Socinians,  a  few  years  ago,  on  the  strength  of  that 
<rery  condition. 

24* 


282  HISTORY    OF    THE 

attention  to  public  matters,  and  learn  to  think  and  act  foi 
themselves.  The  direct  consequence  of  this  was,  that 
when  the  naturally  strong  mind  of  England  was  fairly  rous- 
ed, it  put  forth  its  strength,  but,  like" the  mighty  Hebrew 
when  fallen  into  the  hands  of  his  adversaries,  put  it  forth 
in  blindness.  At  the  commencement  of  the  war  between 
the  king  and  the  Parliament,  ministers  were  appointed  to 
accompany  the  parliamentary^  army,  to  train  the  troops  in 
sound  religious  knowledge,  and  guide  them  in  the  worship 
of  God.  But  this  was  both  an  irksome  and  a  dangerous 
task ;  sufficient  numbers  could  not  be  obtained.  When 
the  Westminster  Assembly  met,  some  of  the  ablest  were 
called  to  attend  its  deliberations;  and  after  the  self-deny- 
ing ordinance,  and  the  new-m.odelling  of  the  army,  it  was 
left  almost  entirely  to  the  erratic  instructions  of  self-called 
and  uneducated  lay-preachers.  It  was  not  strange  that 
enthusiastic  notions  should  be  promulgated,  and  should  be 
widely  received,  when  poured  forth  amidst  such  exciting 
scenes  and  circumstances  by  the  wildly  eloquent  fervor  of 
strong  and  earnest  minds.  And  as  little  was  it  strange 
that  the  thoroughly  learned  and  deep-thinking  divines  of 
the  Assemblj^  should  perceive  the  dangerous  consequences 
to  religion,  morality,  and  peace,  which  must  inevitably 
follow  from  the  unrestrained  diffusion  of  all  the  lawless  and 
extravagant  fancies  by  which  the  fermenting  public  mind 
was  agitated  and  borne  along.  They  knew  what  had  taken 
place  in  Germany,  when  the  peasantry  were  roused  to 
insurrectionary  tumults  by  the  licentious  principles  and 
harangues  of  the  Anabaptists,  and  they  dreaded  the  occur- 
rence of  similar  events  in  England.  For  such  reasons  they 
were  exceedingly  anxious  that  a  regular  and  authoritative 
system  of  Church  government  and  discipline  should  be 
established,  and  put  in  operation  with  all  convenient  speed  ; 
and  this  wish  was  in  itself  of  a  truly  pious  and  patriotic 
nature,  even  though  it  could  be  proved  that  the  means  by 
which  it  was  sought  to  be  realized  were  not  the  most  judi- 
cious that  could  have  been  imagined. 

This  cause  of  reflection  leads  us  to  make  some  inquiry 
into  the  subject  of  religious  toleration,  of  which  so  much 
has  been  said  and  written,  in  the  present  as  well  as  in  for- 
mer times.  The  term  itself,  toleration  in  matters  of  religion^ 
•s  one  which   has  rarely  been   defined  with  that  care  and 


WESI'MINSTRR    ASSF.MKLV.  283 

exactness  which  its  great  importance  demands;  conse- 
quently, the  whole  subject  is  liable  to  every  sort  of  sophis- 
tical perversion  5  and  very  many  of  the  controversial  writ- 
ings that  have  appeared  concerning  it  start  from  different 
points,  and  run  on  either  in  parallel  or  in  diverging  lines, 
without  the  possibility  of  ever  arriving  at  the  same  con- 
clusion. Many  thousands  have  been  oppressed,  persecuted, 
and  put  to  death,  for  maintaining  and  promoting  God's 
revealed  truth;  many  thousands  have  sufiered  equal  ex- 
tremities for  maintaining  and  promoting  satanic  falsehood  ; 
and  many  thousands  have  sustained  all  degrees  of  punish- 
ment for"  the  perpetratio.n  of  immorality  and  crime.  But 
who  will  assert  that  the  same  principle  appears  in  all  these 
cases  I  Who  will  say,  that  because  it  is  right  to  suppress 
and  punish  the  comm'ission  of  crime,  therefore  it  is  right 
to  suppress  and  punish  men  for  asserting  religious  truth  1 
Or,  that  because  it  is  wrong  to  suppress  truth,  therefore  it 
is  wrong  to  suppress  crime,  or  discountenance  error  ? 
But  men""  try  to  escape  from  such  reasoning,  by  asserting 
that  truth  cannot  be  ascertained  with  certainty  ;  arid  that 
therefore  it  is  best  to  give  equal  toleration  to  all  opinions, 
lest  a  grievous  mistake  should  be  committed,  and  truth 
suppressed  instead  of  error.  This  is  the  language  of  scep- 
ticism, and  the  principle  which  it  promulgates  is  not  tole- 
ration, but  latitudinarian  laxity  and  licentiousness.  Such 
language  really  implies,  either  that  God  did  not  intend  to 
convey  savinir  truth  in  a  manner  intelligible  to  the  minds 
of  me-n,  or  that  he  failed  in  his  intention.  But  since  few 
will  be  found  reckless  enough  to  maintain  such  opinions 
in  their  naked  deformity,  the  advocates  of  sceptical  laxity 
have  recourse  to  ev(  ry  kind  of  evasion,  in  order  to  conceal 
alike  the  nature  of  the  principle  which  they  support  and  of 
that  \vhich  they  oppose.  And,  unhappily,  these  evasions 
are  but  too  consonant  to  the  character  of  the  fallen  mind 
of  man,  which  is  "  enmity  against  God,  and  is  not  subject 
to  the  law  o.f  God,  neither  indeed  can  be."  This  is  a  truth 
which  the  sincere  Christian  feels  and  knows,  but  which 
philosophers  and  politicians  reject,  despise,  and  hate. 

The  essence  of  the  inquiry  is,  "  Has  God  revealed 
sacred  saving  truth  to  man,  as  the  only  sure  guide  and  rule 
in  all  religious,  moral,  and  social  duties'?"  And  if  this  be 
admitt*»d,  then  arises  the  next  question, — "Can   this  truth 


284  IIISTOKY    OF    TH1-: 

be  so  ft^Uj'' ascertained  and  known  as  to  become  a  sufficient 
guide  and  rule  in  all  such  duties  1"  If  this,  too,  should  be 
admitted,  we  then  arrive  at  the  important  practical  inquiry, 
— "In  what  manner  may  the  knoAvledge  of  this  sacred  sav- 
ing truth  be  most  successfully  diffused  throughout  the 
world  1"  For  if  such  truth  has  been  revealed,  and  can  be 
known,  man's  first  duty  must  be  to  know  it  himself,  and 
his  next,  to  communicate  it  to  others.  But  he  may  err  in 
this  second  point  of  duty,  and  may  actually  impede,  while 
he  is  in' ending  to  promote,  its  progress.  Few  will  deny 
that  it  is  the  duty  of  every  man,  in  his  station,  to  encour- 
age the  extension  of  truth  by  every  legitimate  means  within 
his  power  ;  but  it  does  not  at  once  appear  so  clear,  whether 
it  be  also  bis  duty  to  engage  so  actively  in  such  a  removal 
of  opposing  obstacles  as  would  involve  the  direct  suppres- 
sion of  error.  And  it  is  at  this  stage  of  the  inquiry  that 
the  question  of  religious  toleration  arises  in  its  proper 
form  and  character.  For  it  never  ought  to  be  made  a  ques- 
tion, whether  truth  ought  to  be  tolerated  or  not, — truth 
ought  to  be  encouraged  and  diffused  ;  but  the  question  is. 
Ought  error  also,  and  with  equal  directness,  to  be  sup- 
pressed 1  The  best  method  of  obtaining  a  right  answer  to 
this  inquiry  is,  to  consult  the  Word  of  God,  and  to  inves- 
tigate the  nature  of  conscience.  The  Word  of  God,  in 
almost  innumerable  instances,  commands  the  direct  encour- 
agement of  truth,  and  also  the  suppression  of  certain  pub- 
lic forms  of  error, — as  of  idolatry  and  blasphemy  ;  but 
gives  no  authority  to  man  to  judge  and  punish  errors  of 
the  mind,  so  far  as  these  amount  not  to  viola'^ions  of  known 
and  equitable  laws,  and  disturb  not  the  peace  of  society. 
And  with  regard  to  the  nature  of  conscience,  it  is  mani- 
fest to  every  thinking  man,  that  conscience  cannot  be  com- 
pelled. It  may  be  enlightened,  it  may  be  convinced,  but 
its  very  nature  is  the  free  exercise  of  that  self-judging 
faculty  which  is  the  essential  principle  of  personal  respon- 
sibility. Hence  it  is  evident,  that  it  is  alike  contrary  to 
the  Word  of  God  and  to  the  nature  of  conscience,  for  man 
to  attempt  to  promote  truth  by  the  compulsive  suppression 
of  error,  when  that  error  does  not  obtrude  itself  on  public 
view  by  open  violation  of  God's  commandments  and  the 
just  laws  of  the  land.  But  it  by  no  means  follows,  that 
toleration  means,  or  ought  to  mean,  equal  favor  shown  to 


Wr.STMhXSTER    ASSEMlJLY  285 

error  aj;  to  truth.  Truth  oiig-lit  to  be  expressly  favored 
and  cncourag-ed  ;  erring-  men  oug-ht  to  be  treated  with  all 
tenderness  and  compassionate  toleration  ;  but  error  itself 
ought  to  be  condemned,  and  all  fair  means  employed  for 
its  extirpation.  This  could  never  lead  to  j)ersecution  ;  be- 
Ciiuse  it  would  constantly  preserve  the  distinction  between 
the  abstract  error  and  the  man  whose  misfortune  it  is  to  be 
an  erring  man,  and  to  whom  it  would  show  all  tenderness^ 
while  it  strove  to  rescue  liim  from  the  evil  consequences 
of  those  errvoneous  notions  by  which  he  w-is  blinded  and 
misled. 

There  is  great  reason  to  believe,  that  the  Presbyterians 
and  the  Independents  of  the  AVestminster  Assembly,  mis- 
apprehended each  other's  opinions  on  the  subject  of  reli- 
gious toleration.  What  the  Presbyterians  understood 
their  opponents  to  mean  by  that  term  was  what  they  called 
a  "'boundless  toleration,"  implying  equal  encouragement 
to  all  shades  and  kinds  of  religious  opinions,  however 
wild,  extravagant,  and  pernicious  in  then-  principles,  and 
in  their  evident  tendency.  And  when  they  somewhat 
vehemently  condemned  such  laxity  and  licentiousness,  the 
Independents  seem  to  have  thought  that  they  intended  or 
desired  the  forcible  suppression  of  all  opinions  that  differed 
from  their  own.  Yet  surely  the  Independents  might  have 
better  understood  both  the  principles  and  the  practice  of 
Presbyterian  Churches.  In  Holland,  a  Presbyterian  coun- 
try, they  had  themselves  enjoyed  the  most  complete  and 
undij<turbed  toleration  in  religious  matters.  They  had 
often  witnessed  the  interposition  of  the  Scottish  divines 
on  their  behalf  in  the  debates  of  the  Assembly  ;  and  if  they 
experienced  somewhat  sharper  treatment  and  more  pointed 
opposition  from  the  Engli'sh  Presbyterians,  that  might 
easily  be  explained  by  the  difference  of  temper  in  men 
struggling  to  obtain  the  establishment  of  a  system,  and  in 
m.en  living  in  that  system  when  established,  and  then  act- 
ing according  to  its  native  spirit  and  character.  They 
might  have  made  allowance  also  for  the  feeling  of  excited 
alarm  with  which  the  Presbyterians  regarded  the  porten- 
tous growth  and  multiplication  of  heretical  sects,  alike  dan- 
gerous to  religious  truth,  lo  moral  purity,  and  to  national 
peace;  for  it  must  be  observed,  that  during  Cromwell's 
administration,  when  the  Independents  were  in  the  enjoy* 


286 


HISTORY    OF    THE 


merit  of  chief  power,  many  of  these  sects  (such  as  the 
Levellers,  the  Fifth-Monarchy  Men,  the  Socinians,  the 
Antinomians,  the  Quakers,  &c.)  were  forcibly  suppressed, 
without  any  opposition  being  offered  by  thern  to  this  sup- 
pression, as  an  intolerant  inTerfereuce  with  liberty  of  con- 
science. The  only  explanation,  we  apprehend,  which  can 
be  given  of  this  inconsistency  of  the  Independents,  is  one 
nut  very  creditable  to  their  character  for  integrity  of  prin- 
ciple. During  their  struggle  with  the  Presbyterians  they 
needed  the  support  of  numbers,  being  but  few  themselves, 
and  therefore  they  advocated  a  "boundless  toleration,"— 
of  w^hich  they  did  not  really  approve,  and  which,  when  in 
power  themselves,  they  did  not  grant.* 

It  has  been  often  confidently  asserted,  that  the  Indepen- 
dents were  the  first  wdio  rightly  understood  and  publicly 
advocated  the  great  principle  of  religious  toleration.  That 
they  did  assert  that  principle  is  certain  ;  but  that  they 
Avere  the  first  who  did  so  is  not  the  truth.  Luther  declared, 
that  "  The  Church  ought  not  to  force  persons  to  helieve,  nor 
to  animadvert  capitally  on  those  whoVollow  a  difl^erent  reli 
gion  :"  "  That  to  believe  is  somethino-  free,  yea,  divine, 
being  the  fruit  of  the  r  pirit  ;  wherefore  it  cannot,  and 
ought  not,  to  be  forced  by  ar.y  external  violence."  The 
language  of  Zuingle  is  not  ess  explicit:  "It  is  at  once 
contrary  to  the  Gospel  and  to  reason,  to  employ  violeni 
measures  to  extort  a  confessi  m  of  faiih  contrary  to  con- 
science. Reason  and  persuasion  are  the  arms  that  a  Chris- 
tian  ought  to  employ.  Even  Calvin  and  Knox,  terrible  as 
their  very  names  appear  to  some,  and  associated  with  the 
very  essence  of  intolerance,  repeatedly  expressed  senti 
ments  precisely  similar,  strenuously  maintaining  the  liberty 
*  "  Some,  perhaps,  bj'  a  toleration  understand  an  universal,  uncon- 
trolled  license  of  living  as  you  please  in  things  conoerning  religion  :  that 
every  one  may  be  lei  alone,  and  not  so  much  as  discountenanced  in 
doing,  speaking,  acting,  how,  wiiat,  where,  or  when  he  pleaseth,  in  all 
such  things  as  conceineth  the  worship  of  God,  articles  of  belief,  or  gene- 
rally anything  commanded  in  religion.  And  in  the  meant  me,  the  par- 
lies at  variance,  and  litii^ant  about  diflerences,  freely  to  revile,  reject 
and  despise  one  another,  according  as  their  provoked  genius  shall  dis- 
pose their  minds  thereunto.  J\ow,  truly,  though  every  one  of  this  mind 
pretend  to  cry  for  mercy  to  be  extended  unto  poor  afflicted  T  a  .  ,  yet  I 
cannot  but  be  persuaded,  that  such  a  toleration  would  prove  ex  •  eding 
pernicious  to  all  sorts  of  men."— Essay  by  Dr.  Owen,  app  >!iJv  to  a 
Sermon  preached  before  the  House  of  Commons,  April  29,  16  16  ;   \.  66 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBLY.  287 

of  the  conscience,  and  condemning  persecution.  And  in 
Scotland,  where  the  Presbyterian  Church  was  early  esta- 
blished, and  repeatedly  enjoyed  much  power,  often  as  that 
Ch.urch  suffered  persecution  in  every  form  and  degree,  it 
never,  in  its  day  of  power,  persecuted  its  enemies  in  return. 
This  some  will  think  a  strange  assertion,  accustomed  ns 
they  have  been  to  hear  so  much  about  Presbyterian  into- 
lerance ;  yet  it  is  not  more  strange  than  true.  And  did  our 
space  permit,  we  could  furnish  ample  proof  that  the  true 
principles  of  religious  toleration  were  both  held  and  prac- 
tised in  Scotland  by  the  Presbyterian  Church,  both  before 
Independency  had  come  into  existence,  and  during  the  very 
time  of  the  strugcrle  between  the  two  parties  in  England. 
And  even  in  the  Westminster  Assembly,  at  the  time  when 
the  subject  of  toleration  was  under  discussion,  the  true 
principles  of  religious  liberty  were  avowedly  held  and  pub- 
licly taught  by  the  Presbyterian  divines,  the  very  men  who 
are  so  vehemently  accused  of  intolerance,  at  least  as  dis- 
tinctly and  earnestly  as  they  were  by  the  Independents. 
Such  sentiments  as  the  following  were  frequently  expressed 
by  them  in  their  public  sermons  : — ''  Fierce  and  furious 
prosecution,  even  of  a  good  cause,  is  rather  prejudice  than 
promotion.  We  must  tenaciously  adhere  to  all  divine 
truths  ourselves,  and,  with  our  wisest  moderation,  plant 
and  propagate  them  in  others.  Opposites,  indeed,  must  be 
opposed,  gainsaid,  reclaimed  ;  but  all  must  be  done  in  a 
way,  and  by  the  means,  appointed  from  heaven.  It  is  one 
thing  to  show  moderation  to  pious,  peaceable,  and  tender 
consciences;  it  is  another  thing  to  proclaim  beforehand 
toleration  to  impious,  fiery,  and  unpeaceable  opinions." 

In  the  last  sentence  of  this  quotation  a  distinction  is 
drawn  which  touches  the  essential  point  of  the  controversy 
between  the  Presbyterians  and  the  Independents.  The 
Presbyterians  wished  Church  government  to  be  established 
in  the  first  instance,  and  then  a  toleration  to  be  granted  to 
tender  consciences  :  the  independents,  on  the  other  hand, 
strove  to  obtain  a  legislative  toleration  first,  and  then  it 
would  have  been  a  matter  of  little  moment  which,  or  whe- 
ther any  form  of  Church  government  should  be  established 
The  Presbyterians  not  only  apprehended  that  this  would 
amount  to  the  establishment  of  the  Independent  system, 
instead  of  their  own,  and,  consequently,  to  the  frustration 


•288  HISTORY    OF    THE 

of  the  very  object  for  which  the  Assembly  had  met,  ztnd 
for  which  they  had  sworn  the  Covenant,  namely,  the  pro- 
motion of  uniformity  in  religious  matters  throughout  Pro- 
testant Christendom,  Independency  being  prevalent  in  no 
European  country  ;  but  also,  they  regarded  it  with  strong 
alarm,  as  sanctioning  all  the  pernicious  heresies  with 
which  England  abounded,  and  establishing  the  principle  of 
universal  licentiousne-s.  On  the  other  hand,  the  Indepen- 
dents knew  well,  that  unless  the  spirit  of  a  Presbyterian 
Church  should  be  different  in  England  from  what  it  was  in 
every  other  country,  its  establishment  would  not  prevent 
toleration  to  the  utmost  extent  that  God's  Word  warrants, 
and  an  enlightened  conscience  can  require.  Such,  indeed, 
was  the  conviction  of  Dr.  Owen,  who,  though  not  a  mem- 
ber of  the  Westminsteif  Assembly,  was  thoroughly  ac- 
quainted with  many  of  the  leading  Presbyterians,  knew 
their  sentiments,  and  understood  their  system.  "  Had  the 
Presbyterian  government,"  says  he,  "been  settled  at  the 
king's  restoration,  by  the  encouragement  and  protection  of 
the  practice  of  it,  without  a  rigorous  imposition  of  every- 
thing supposed  by  any  to  belong  thereunto,  or  a  mixture 
of  human  institutions,  if  there  had  been  any  appearance  of 
a  schism  or  separation  between  the  parties,  1  do  judge  they 
would  have  been  both  to  blame ;  for  they  allowed  distinct 
communion  upon  distinct  apprehensions  of  thins^s  belong- 
ina:  to  Church  order  or  worship, — all  '  keeping  the  unity 
of  the  Spirit  in  the  bond  of  peace.'  If  it  shall  be  asked, 
Then  why  did  they  not  formerly  agree  in  the  Assembly  ( 
I  answer,  1.  I  was  none  of  them,  and  cannot  tell.  2.  They 
did  agree,  in  my  judgment,  well  enough,  if  they  could 
have  thought  so  ;  and  further,  I  am  not  concerned  in  the 
difference."  * 

The  real  cause,  most  probably,  why  they  did  not  agree, 
was  what  has  been  already  suggested, — that  the  intriguing 
spirit  of  Nye  involved  the  Assembly  Independents  in  the 
political  schemes  of  Cromwell.  But  though  that  ambitious 
man  made  use  of  them  to  promote  his  designs,  by  retard- 
ing the  settlement  of  anything  till  his  power  was  matured  ; 
and  though  he  continued  to  bestow  upon  them  the  chief 
share  of  his  favor  after  he  had  seized   upon  the  sceptre  of 

*  Inqiiiry  into  the  Original,  &c.,  of  Evangelical  Churches.  Works 
<rol.  XX.  pp.  .322,  323. 


WESTMINSTER     ASSEMBLV.  5?^^ 

imperial  sway,  lie  neither  granted,  nor  did  they  sue  for, 
universal  toleration.  This  is  placed  beyond  doubt  by  th^ 
circumstances  connected  with  some  ecclesiastical  arrange- 
ments proposed  in  his  Parliament  in  the  year  1054-.  The 
leading  Independent  ministers  laid  before  the  Committee 
of  Triers,  at  that  time  formed,  a  series  of  requests,  in  the 
orm  of  a  representation,  one  article  of  which  was  as  fol- 
lows : — "  Tliat  this  honorable  Committee  be  desired  to 
propose  to  the  Parliament,  that  such  who  do  not  receive 
those  principles  of  religion,  without  acknowledgment 
whereof  the  Scriptures  do  clearly  and  plainly  affirm  that 
salvation  is  net  to  be  obtained,  as  those  formerly  com- 
plained of  by  the  ministers,  may  not  be  suffered  to 
preach  or  promulgate  anything  in  opposition  unto  such 
principles." 

In  consequence  of  this,  a  discussion  arose  respecting  the 
extent  to  which  religious  toleration  was  to  be  carried, 
when  "  it  was  voted,  that  all  should  be  tolerated  or  in- 
dulged who  professed  the  fundamentals  of  Christianity  j" 
and  a  committee  was  appointed  to  nominate  certain  divines 
to  draw  up  a  catalogue  of  the  fundamentals,  to  be  present- 
ed to  the  House.  These  divines  accordingly  drew  up  sixteen 
articles,  Dr.  Owen  having  the  chief  hand  in  the  matter,  and 
presented  them  to  the  Committee  of  Parliament,  by  whom 
they  were  ordered  to  be  printed.  A  strict  interpretation 
and  application  of  these  sixteen  fundamental  principles  of 
religion  would  exclude  from  toleration  all  Deists,  Papists, 
Socinians,  Arians,  Antinomians,  and  Quakers,  and  even 
Arminians,  by  no  very  strained  construction.*      From  this 

*  «  The  Principles  of  Faitli  presented  by  Mr.  Thomas  Goodwin,  Mr. 
Nye,  Mr.  Simpson,  and  other  Ministers,  to  the  Committee  of 
Parliament  for  Religion,  &c. 

"  1.  That  the  Holy  Scripture  is  that  rule  of  knowing  God,  and  living 
unto  him,  which  whoso  does  not  believe  cannot  be  saved. 

"  2.  That  there  is  a  God,  who  is  the  Creator,  Governor,  and  Judge, 
of  the  world, — which  is  to  be  received  by  faith  ;  and  every  other  way  of 
the  knowledge  of  him  is  insufficient. 

"  3.  That  this  God,  who  is  the  Creator,  is  eternally  distinct  from  all 
creatures,  in  his  beina:  and  blessedness. 

"  4.  That  this  God  is  one,  in  three  persons  or  subsistences. 

"  5.  That  Jesus  Christ  is  the  only  Mediator  between  God  and 
without  the  knowledge  of  whom  there  is  no  salvation. 

«  6.   That  this  Jesus  Christ  ic  the  true  God. 

"  7.  That  this  Jesus  Christ  is  also  true  man. 

25 


290  HISTORY    OF    THE 

iit  is  evident,  that  whether  the  Presbyterians  really  did  un- 
derstand and  act  upon  the  true  prhiciples  of  religious 
liberty  or  not,  it  cannot  with  truth  be  said,  that  the  views 
of  the  Independents  were  in  any  respect  more  liberal  and 
enlarged.  For  this  we  blame  them  not,  but  merely  state 
the  fact.  Perhaps  the  exact  truth  is,  that  their  opinions 
on  the  subject  were  nearly  identical,  all  the  difference  be- 
tween them  being  that  of  position  and  circumstance  ;  and 
it  may  fairly  be  admitted,  that  the  subject  had  not  at  that 
period  received  all  the  attention  it  deserved,  and  the  eluci- 
dation of  which  it  was  capable.  It  was,  however,  brought 
so  strongly  before  the  notice  of  the  public  mind,  and 
attention  was  so  forcibly  directed  to  it  by  the  ejection  of 
the  two  thousand  ministers  on  St.  Bartholomew's  day,  and 
by  subsequent  events  during  that  and  the  succeeding 
reign,  that  it  became  one  of  the  essential  elements  which 
produced  the  Revolution  of  168S,  and  was  secured  by  the 
Toleration  Act  of  the  following  year.  The  Toleration  Act 
itself  may  therefore  be  fairly  regarded  as  one  of  the  results 
of  the  Westminster  Assembly,  though  few  have  been 
hitherto  disposed  to  trace  it  to  that  truly  illustrious  source. 
There  was  one  great,  and  even  sublime  idea,  brought 
somewhat  indefinitely  before  the  Westminster  Assembly, 
which  has  not  yet  been  realized, — the  idea  of  a  Protestant 
union  throughout  Christendom,  not  merely  for  the  purpose 

"  8.   That  this  Jesu«  Christ  is  God  and  man  in  one  person. 

"  9.  That  this  Jesus  Christ  is  our  Redeemer,  who,  by  paying  a  ran- 
som, and  bearing  our  sins,  has  made  satisfaction  for  them. 

"  10.  That  this  same  Jesus  Christ  is  he  that  was  crucified  at  Jerusa- 
lem, and  rose  again,  and  ascended  into  heaven. 

''  11.  That  this  same  Jesus  Christ,  being  the  only  God  and  man  in 
one  person,  remains  for  ever  a  distinct  person  from  all  saints  and  angels 
notwithstanding  their  union  and  communion  with  him. 

"  12.  That  all  men  by  nature  are  dead  in  trespasses  and  sins;  and  no 
man  can  be  saved  unl-s?  he  be  born  again,  repent,  and  believe. 

"  13.  That  we  a;e  jisiified  and  saved  by  grace,  and  faith  in  Jesus 
Christ,  and  not  by  Wv)rks. 

"  14.  That  to  continue  in  any  known  sin,  upon  what  pretence  or  prin- 
ciple soever,  is  damnable. 

"  15.  Tliat  God  is  to  be  worshipped  according  to  his  own  will;  and 
whosoever  shall  forsake  and  despise  all  the  duties  of  his  worship  cannot 
be  saved. 

"  16.  That  the  dead  shall  rise;  and  that  there  is  a  day  of  judgment, 
wherein  all  shall  appear,  some  to  go  into  everlasting  life,  and  some  into 
everlasting  condemnation." — Neal,  vol.  ii.  pp.  621,622. 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBLY.  291 

of  counterbalancing  Popery,  but  in  order  to  purify, 
strengthen,  and  unite  all  true  Christian  Churches,  so  that 
with  combined  energy  and  zeal  they  might  go  forth,  in 
glad  compliance  with  the  Redeemer's  commands,  teaching 
q11  nations,  and  preaching  the  everlasting  Gospel  to  every 
creature  under  heaven.  This  truly  magnificent,  and  also 
truly  Christian  idea,  seems  to  have  originated  in  the  mind 
of  that  distinguished  man,  Alexander  Henderson.  It  was 
suggested  by  him  to  the  Scottish  commissioners,  and  by 
them  partially  brought  before  the  English  Parliament,  re- 
questing them  to  direct  the  Assembly  to  write  letters  to 
the  Pro-testant  Churches  in  France,  Holland,  Switzerland, 
and  other  Reformed  Churches.  Henderson  had  too  much 
wisdom  to  state  the  subject  fully  to  the  Parliament,  lest 
they  should  be  startled  by  a  thought  vast  beyond  their 
conception.  They  gave  to  the  Assembly  the  desired 
direction,  and  the  letters  were  prepared  and  sent.  A  hasty 
perusal  of  these  letters  might  not  suggest  the  idea  of  a 
great  Protestant  union,  the  greater  part  of  them  being  occu- 
pied with  a  statement  of  the  causes  which  had  led  to  the 
calling  of  the  Assembly,  and  in  vindication  of  themselves 
against  the  accusations  where\vith  they  might  be  assailed. 
But  towards  the  conclusion  the  idea  is  dimly  traced  ;  and 
along  with  these  letters  were  sent  copies  of  the  Solemn 
League  and  Covenant, — a  document  which  might  itself 
form  the  basis  of  such  a  Protestant  union.  The  deep- 
thinking  divines  of  the  Netherlands  apprehended  the  idea, 
and  in  their  answer,  not  only  expressed  their  approbation 
of  the  Covenant,  but  also  desired  to  join  in  it  with  the 
British  kingdoms.  Nor  did  they  content  themselves  with 
the  mere  expression  of  approval  and  willingness  to  join. 
A  letter  was  soon  afterwards  sent  to  the  Assembly  from 
the  Hague,  written  by  Duraeus  (the  celebrated  John  Dury), 
offering  to  come  to  the  Assembly,  and  containing  a  copy 
of  a  vow  which  he  had  prepared  and  tendered  to  the  distin- 
guished Oxenstiern,  chancellor  of  Sweden,  wherein  he 
bound  himself  "  to  prosecute  a  reconciliation  between 
Protestants  in  point  of  religion."* 

That  this  was  the  real  object  contemplated  in  this  re- 
markable correspondence  is  indicated  with  sufficient  plain- 
ness by  Baillie  :  "  We   are   thinking   of  a   new  work  over 
•  Lightfoot,  p.  86. 


292  HISTORY  OF  THE 

sea,  if  this  Churcli  were  settled.  The  times  of  antichrist's 
fall  are  approaching.  The  very  outward  providence  of 
God  seems  to  be  disposing  France,  Spain,  Italy,  and  Ger- 
many, for  the  receiving  of  the  Gospel.  When  the  cur- 
tains of  the  Lord's  tabernacle  are  thus  far,  and  much  fur- 
ther enlarged,  by  the  means  which  yet  appear  not,  how 
shall  our  mouth  be  filled  with  laughter,  our  tongue  with 
praise,  and  our  heart  with  rejoicing!"*  There  are  several 
other  hints  of  a  similar  character  to  be  found  in  Baillie's 
Letters ;  and  on  one  occasion  Henderson  procured  a  pass- 
port to  go  to  Holland,  most  probably  for  the  purpose  of 
prosecuting  this  grand  idea.  But  the  intrigues  of  politi- 
cians, the  delays  caused  by  the  conduct  of  the  Independ- 
ents, and  tlie  narrow-minded  Erastianism  of  the  English 
Parliament,  all  conspired  to  prevent  the  Assembly  from 
entering  further  into  that  truly  glorious  Christian  enter- 
prise. Days  of  trouble  and  darkness  came;  persecution 
wore  out  the  great  men  of  that  remarkable  period  ;  pure 
and  vital  Christianity  was  stricken  to  the  earth  and  tram- 
pled under  foot  ;  and  when  the  time  of  delrxerance  came 
at  the  Revolution,  it  found  the  Churches  too  much  exhaust- 
ed to  resume  the  mighty  tasks  begun,  but  not  accomplish- 
ed, in  the  previous  generation.  Peace  and  repose  were 
chiefly  sought  ;  listless  inactivity  and  spiritual  deadness 
ensued;  and  all  the  noble  purposes  and  great  ideas  of  a 
former  age  were  forgotten  or  despised. 

But  although  the  Westminster  Assembly  and  its  labors 
seemed  to  have  been  thus  consigned  to  oblivion,  or  men- 
tioned by  prelatic  or  infidel  historians  merely  as  a  topic 
on  which  they  might  freely  pour  forth  their  spite  or  their 
mockery,  its  influence  in  the  deep  under-current  of  the  na- 
tional mind  was  unseen,  but  was  not  unfelt.  Even  in 
England,  where  every  effort  was  made  to  destroy  alike  its 
principles  and  their  fruit,  it  succeeded  in  communicating 
a  secret  impulse  of  irresistible  energy  to  the  nation's 
heart.  This  was  first  proved  by  the  noble  testimony  borne 
on  St.  Bartholomew's  day,  in  defence  of  religious  liberty. 
And  the  feeling  thus  called  into  action  showed  its  might 
when  afterwards  the  Popish  tyrant,  James  VII.,  was  hurled 
from  his  throne  by  the  indignant  voice  of  a  free  Protestant 
people;  Let  it  be  frankly  granted  that  the  English  bishopa 
•  Bailiie,  vol.  ii.  p.  192. 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBLY.  293 

bore  a  considerable  part  in  tbat  memorable  Revolution  ; 
but  let  it  also  be  remembered,  that  in  their  youth  they 
had  imbibed  the  principles  of  religious  and  civil  liberty 
under  the  instruction  of  Presbyterian  professors  and  mas- 
ters in  the  universities.  And  let  it  also  be  remembered 
that  the  Toleration  Act  was  the  production  of  the  same 
well-trained  g-eneration  ;  and  when  these  things  are  borne 
HI  mind,  it  will  not  be  said  that  the  nation  derived  no  ad- 
vantage from  the  labors  of  the  Westminster  Assembly. 

In  Scotland  its  results  were  more  directly  and  signally 
beneficial,  being  fully  accepted  by  the  Church,  and  ratified 
by  the  State.  Not  even  twenty-eight  years  of  ruthless 
persecution  could  extinguish  the  bright  light  of  sacred 
truth  which  it  had  contributed  to  shed  over  our  own  north- 
ern hills,  or  trample  out  of  existence  the  strong  spirit  of 
liberty  which  it  inspired  and  hallowed.  What  can  ever 
expel  from  the  mind  and  heart  of  a  Christian  people  that 
single  sentence  of  the  Confession  of  Faith  :  "  God  alone 
is  Lord  of  the  conscience,  and  hath  left  it  free  from  the 
doctrines  and  commandments  of  men  which  are  in  any- 
thing contrary  to  his  Word,  or  beside  it,  in  matters  of  faith 
or  worship."  The  people  who  can  feel  and  understand 
that  sacred  truth  can  never  be  enslaved.  And  although, 
after  the  Union,  the  perfidy  of  traitorous  statesmen  intro- 
duced the  unconstitutional  element  of  patronage  into  the 
external  arrangements  of  the  Church  of  Scotland,  contrary 
to  the  express  stipulations  of  the  Act  of  Security,  by 
which  the  Scottish  nation  had  so  anxiously  sought  to  pro- 
tect their  National  Church  ;  yet  it  required  the  lapse  of 
generations  to  produce  a  race  sufficiently  degenerated  to 
a 'low  the  pernicious  element  to  do  its  work.  Even  when 
a  majority  of  the  Scottish  ministers  had  become  unfaithful, 
the  Confession  of  Faith  and  the  Catechism  continued  to 
infuse  their  strong  and  living  principles  of  Christian  truth 
into  the  hearts  and  minds  of  the  people,  maintaining  a  spi- 
rit and  an  energy  that  nothing  could  subdue.  The  effect 
of  this  was  seen  in  the  Secession  ;  and  not  less  manifestly 
in  the  deep  and  steady  devotedness  with  which  the  minis- 
trations of  evangelical  truth  were  attended  in  the  Estab- 
lished Church  itself.  Such  was  the  state  of  the  Churches 
in  both  kingdoms  throughout  the  listless  length  of  a  dreary 
century, — the  still  and  heavy  torpor  of  lethargic  sluggish- 
25* 


294  HISTORY    OF    THE 

ness  above,  the  silent  but    strong  current  of  a  deep  life 
stream  beneath. 

But  a  time  of  refreshing  and  revival  has  come  ;  the 
lethargic  sleep  has  passed  aAvay;  the  awakening  throb  of 
Christian  life  is  high  and  warm  ;  and  again,  snapping  her 
benumbing  bands  asunder,  the  Church  is  going  forth  on 
her  heavenly  mission  with  renewed  energy  and  power. 
Numerous  and  startling  are  the  coincidences  which  are 
appearing  between  the  period  of  the  Westminster  Assem- 
bly and  the  present  time.  So  strong  are  these,  that  they 
force  upon  a  reflecting  mind  the  thought  that  all  human 
events  move  in  revolving  circles,  one  age  but  reproducing 
a  renewed  aspect  of  the  past.  In  England  we  see  airain 
the  dread  aspect  of  Laudean  Prelacy,  called  indeed  by  a 
new  name,  Puseyism,  but  displaying  all  the  fearful  linea- 
ments of  its  formidable  predecessor,  the  same  in  its  lofty 
pretensions,  in  its  Popish  tendencies,  in  its  supercilious 
contempt  of  every  other  Church,  and  in  its  persecuting 
spirit.  We  see  also  the  civil  power  beginning  to  show 
peculiar  favor  to  this  arrogant  party,  introducing  or  giving 
countenance  to  measures  that  are  darkly  ominous  to  both 
civil  and  religious  libert}^  and  hastening  apparentlj'-  onward 
to  a  crisis  which  all  may  shudder  to  contemplate.  At  the 
same  time,  we  see  the  masses  of  the  community  in  a  state 
ripe  for  any  convulsion,  however  terrible,  having  been  left 
for  generations  uneducated,  and  uninstructed  in  religious 
truth.  And  not  long  since  we  have  seen  a  formidable  con- 
troversy waged  between  the  Established  and  the  Dissent- 
ing Churches,  respecting  the  very  existence  of  a  National 
Church  at  all, — a  controversy,  the  tendency  of  which  was, 
to  prevent  the  union  of  evangelical  Churches,  as  did  the 
controversy  between  the  Presbyterians  and  the  Indepen- 
dents at  the  closely  similar  period  of  the  Westminster  As- 
sembly. In  Scotland  the  National  Church  has  been  aroused 
out  of  its  lethargy,  and  rescued  from  the  dreary  domination 
of  Moderatism.  Again  has  it  become  truly  an  evangelical 
and  a  self-reforming  Church,  prosecuting  vigorously,  at 
the  same  time,  the  great  commission  of  all  Christian 
Churches, — the  extension  of  the  Redeemer's  kingdom 
throughout  the  world.  And  again  has  she  been  arrested 
in  her  career,  and  been  forced  to  engage  in  a  struggle  of 
the  most  perilous   character   against  the    most  formidable 


WEbTiMLXSTER    ASSEMBLY.  295 

worldly  powers  and  influences,  in  which  her  very  existence 
as  nn  Establishment  is  threatened,  if  not  already  virtually 
destroyed.  The  great  conflict  of  two  centuries  since  was 
begun  by  the  attacks  of  Laudean  Prelacy  and  civil  despo- 
tism upon  the  Church  of  S(;otland  ;  similar  attacks  at  the 
present  time,  by  similar  antagonists,  can  scarcely  fail  to 
suggest  the  ])ossibility  of  similar  disastrous  results. 

But  revolving  cycles,  though  similar,  are  not  identical. 
Each  has  in  itself  some  characteristics  of  a  peculiar  nature, 
and  to  that  extent  part  of  its  characteristics  may  terminate 
in  its  own  period,  and  part  may  revive  and  expand  into  the 
new  revolving  movement.  Thus,  while  the  course  of  hu- 
man events  is  one  of  revolving  circles,  one  tends  to  pro- 
duce another,  and  that  to  expand  and  perfect  what  it  receiv 
ed,  and  to  transmit  its  own  new  influences  to  its  successor, 
— all  combining  to  carry  on  the  ripening  and  widening 
movements  that  make  the  world's  history.  The  truth  of 
this  view  may  be  seen  by  closely  marking  the  characteris- 
tics of  the  conflict  which  shook  the  nations  two  hundred 
years  ago,  and  that  which  has  begun  to  shake  them  now. 
At  the  Reformation  the  idea  of  separate  jurisdictions,  cjvil 
and  ecclesiastical,  was  introduced  ;  but  the  supreme  civil 
power  Avished  to  combine  and  possess  both,  and  this  gave 
rise  to  what  is  called  Erastianism.  At  flrst,  however,  the 
conflict  was  waged  chiefly  respecting  uniformity  in  mat- 
ters external,  and  submission  to  all  civil  decrees  concerning 
rites  ceremonies,  vestments,  and  common  prayer.  Subse- 
quently it  related  to  a  still  more  important  point — discipline. 
In  all  these  points  the  unscriptural  encroachments  of  the 
civil  power  were  resisted,  not  so  much,  in  some  instances, 
because  of  their  importance,  as  because  of  the  principle 
which  they  involved.  But  the  present  struggle  regards 
the  actual  assumption  of  supremacy  by  civil  courts  over 
spiritual  courts  as  such,  and  is  therefore  of  a  much  more 
formidable  character  than  that  in  which  our  ancestors  were 
engaged.  The  ancient  contest  was  founded  ostensibly  on 
the  desirableness  of  national  uniformity  in  public  worship  ; 
the  modern  is  founded  ostensibly  on  the  fact  of  endow- 
ments, and  on  the  civil  rights  which  such  endowments  are 
said  to  involve  or  confer.  The  ancient  contest  was  waged 
on  the  ground  of  royal  prerogative  ;  the  modern,  on  the 
ground  of  abstract  law.     In  the  ancient   struggle  the  two 


296  HISTOKY    OF    THE 

kingdoms  strove  to  procure  both  civil  and  religious  liberty 
and  though  for  a  time  both  seemed  lost,  yet  the  result  was 
the  complete  gaining  and  establishing  of  the  former  by  the 
Revolution  of  16S8,  and  the  full  settlement  of  the  British 
constitution.  In  the  modern  struggle  religious  liberty  has 
yet  to  be  asserted,  defended,  and  secured,  and  that,' too, 
against  a  power  in  many  respects  more  formidable  than 
any  that  has  hithsrto  been  encountered  by  the  Christian 
Church — the  power  of  abstract  law,  in  what  is  assumed  to 
be  a  free  country,  and  in  which  religious  toleration  is  un- 
derstood to  be  maintained.  Hence,  whatever  even  seems 
to  oppose  the  decision  of  courts  of  law,  must  expect  to  be 
overwhelmed  with  reproach  and  contumely,  as  if  human 
law  were  infallible,  and  whatever  opposed  it  were  necessa- 
rily wildly  and  intolerably  wrong.  The  Erastianism  of 
human  law  is  Erastianism  in  its  most  pernicious  and  terri- 
ble aspect  ;  and  if  triumphant,  can  end  in  nothing  but  the 
entire  destruction  of  religious  liberty,  and  consequently 
of  true  religion  itself.  Its  direct  aim  is  the  abolition  of 
spiritual  courts;  for  that  is  no  court  where  not  merely  its 
decisions  can  be  reviewed  and  reversed  by  one  of  a  different 
character,  but  where  the  judges  themselves  can  be  punished 
for  their  conscientious  judgments.  And  since  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  instituted  a  government  in  his  Church,  the 
loss  of  spiritual  courts  is  the  loss  of  that  government,  and 
necessarily  the  loss  of  direct  union  with  the  Head  gnd 
King  of  the  Church,  which  is,  in  other  words,  the  loss  of 
spiritual  life  and  true  religion. 

The  cycle  in  which  we  live  displays  much  of  the  impress 
cf  its  predecessor,  and  has  also  duties,  advantages,  and 
perils  of  its  own.  It  is  nov/  too  late  to  cherish  the  hoj  e 
of  at  length  accomplishing  the  Christian  enterprise  for 
which  the  Westminster  Assembly  met  toaether,  and  of 
realizing  the  great  idea  which  filled  the  minds  of  its  most 
eminent  Christian  patriots  \  We  will  not  think  so.  What 
was  premature  then,  may  be  ripe  for  fulfilment  novr.  The 
wide  diffusion  of  knovv^ledge,  the  rapid  communication  of 
thought  and  action  from  clime  to  clime,  and  the  very  pro- 
gress of  events  in  the  world's  history,  have  rendered  many 
a  mighty  undertaking  of  easy  achievement  now,  which,  two 
centuries  ago,  w^as  utterly  impossible.  And  what  was  then 
won  furnishes  a  vantage-ground  on  which  the  struggle  may 


WESTMLXSTER    ASSEMBLY.  297 

be  more  propitiously  waged.  Civil  liberty  and  religious 
toleration  are  citadels,  not  certainly  impregnable,  but  not 
easily  to  be  reduced.  It  is  equally  the  duty  and  the  inte- 
rest of  all  who  value  these  to  unite  in  their  defence  ;  for  the 
loss  of  them  to  one  class  of  British  citizens,  or  to  one 
Church  in  Britain,  would  issue  in  the  loss  of  them  to  all. 
Let  but  the  attempt  be  made,  in  the  spirit  of  sincerity, 
and  faith,  and  prayer,  and  there  may  now  be  realized  a 
Protestant,  or  rather  a  Presbyterian  Union,  embracing  the 
world.  We  say  a  Presbyterian  Union,  for  it  is  a  melancho- 
ly fact  that  Prelatic  Protestantism  is  now  but  another  name 
for  all  that  is  essentially  Popish  ;  so  that  the  hope  of  the 
Christian  world  for  resisting  Popery  and  Infidelity  must  now 
be  placed  in  a  Presbyterian  Union. 

And  the  errors  wdiich  prevented  the  success  of  the 
Westminster  Assembly  may  be  to  us  beacons,  both  warn- 
ing from  danger  and  guiding  on  to  safety.  In  their  case, 
political  influence  and  intrigue  formed  one  baneful  element 
of  deadly  power.  Let  all  political  influence  be  distrusted 
and  avoided,  and  let  political  intrigue  be  utterly  unknown 
in  all  our  religious  deliberations.  In  times  of  trouble  and 
alarm,  "  Trust  not  in  princes,  nor  in  the  sons  of  men," 
with  its  divine  counterpart,  "Trust  in  the  Lord,  and  stay 
yourselves  upon  your  God,"  should  be  the  watchword  and 
reply  of  all  true  Christian  Churches.  Dissensions  among 
brethren,  groundless  jealousies,  and  misconstructions,  and 
want  of  openness  and  candor,  were  grievously  pernicious  to 
the  Westminster  Assembly.  If  the  Presbyterians  and  the 
Independents  could  have  banished  the  spirit  of  dissension, 
expelled  all  petty  jealousy,  and  hid  their  hearts  open  to 
each  otlier  in  godly  simplicity  and  sincerity,  all  the  unifor- 
mity that  was  really  necessary  might  have  been  easily 
obtained.  Their  errors  have  been  traced  and  noted,  not 
from  any  pleasure  in  such  a  task,  but  that  they  may  now 
be  understood  and  shunned.  And  if  all  truly  evangelical 
Christians,  whether  they  be  Presbyterians,  or  Independents, 
or  Baptists,  or  Methodists,  or  Episcopalians,  such  as  some 
that  could  be  named,  would  but  give  full  scope  to  their  al- 
ready existing  and  strong  principles  and  feelings  of  faith 
and  hope  and  love,  there  could  be  little  difiiculty  in  fram- 
ing such  a  Christian  Union, — term  it  Presbyterian  or  Evan- 
gelical, so  that  it  be  truly  scriptural,  — as  might  be  able,  by 


298  HISTORY    OF    THE 

the  blessing  arxd  the  help  of  God,  to  stem  and  bear  bacl( 
the  growing  and  portentous  tide  of  Popery  and  Infidelity, 
that  threaten,  with  their  proud  waves,  once  more  to  over 
whelm  the  world. 

Has  not  the  time  for  this  great  Evangelical  and  Scrip- 
tural Union  come  1  It  is  impossible  for  any  one  to  look 
abroad  upon  the  general  aspect  of  the  world  with  even  a 
hasty  glance,  without  perceiving  indications  of  an  almost 
universal  preparation  for  some  great  event.  The  nations 
of  the  earth  are  still — not  in  peace,  but,  like  wearied  com- 
batants, resting  on  their  arms  a  brief  breathing-space,  that, 
with  recovered  strength  and  quickened  animosity,  they 
may  spring  anew  to  the  mortal  struggle.  During  this  fal- 
lacious repose  there  has  been,  and  there  is,  an  exertion  of 
the  most  intense  and  restless  activity,  by  principles  the 
most  fiercely  hostile,  for  the  acquisition  of  partizans.  Des- 
potism and  democracy,  superstition  and  infidelity,  have 
alike  been  mustering  their  powers  and  calling  forth  their 
energies,  less  apparently  for  nmtual  destruction,  according 
to  their  wont  and  nature,  than  in  order  to  form  an  unna- 
tural coalition  and  conspiracy  against  the  very  existence 
of  free,  pure,  and  spiritual  Christianity.  Nor,  in  one  point 
of  view,  has  Christianity  been  recently  lying  supine  and 
dormant  Many  a  noble  enterprise  for  the  extension  of 
the  Gospel  at  home  and  abroad  has  been  planned  and  exe- 
cuted; and  the  great  doctrines  of  saving  truth  have  been 
clearly  explained  and  boldly  proclaimed,  with  earnest 
warmth  and  uncompromising  faithfulness.  A  time  of  re- 
freshing also  has  come  from  the  presence  of  the  Lord, — a 
spirit  of  revival  has  been  poured  forth  upon  the  thirsty 
Church,  and  the  hearts  of  Christian  brethren  have  learned 
to  melt  and  blend  with  a  generous  and  rejoicing  sympathy, 
to  which  they  had  too  long  been  strangers.  Can  all  these 
things  be  beheld  and  passed  lightly  over  as  leading  to 
nothing,  and  portending  nothing  1  That  w^ere  little  short 
of  blind  infatuation.  What  they  do  fully  portend  it  were 
presumptuous  to  say,  but  it  is  not  difficult  to  say  for  what 
they  form  an  unprecedented  preparation.  What  now  pre- 
vents a  world-wide  Evangelical  and  Scriptural  Union  1 
"All  things  are  prepared,  come  to  the  marriage."  "If  ye 
love  Me,  love  one  another."  "Because  He  laid  down  his 
life   for  us,  we  also  ought  to  lay   down  our  lives  for  the 


WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBLY.  299 

brethren."  Had  these  been  fully  the  principles  and  rules 
of  conduct  of  the  Westminster  Assembly,  its  gre;«t  idea 
mijrht  have  been  realized.  Let  them  be  those  that  animate 
and  guide  all  Churches  now.  They  have  been  felt  in  our 
great  unions  for  prayer  ;  they  should  be  felt  by  all  who  are 
preparing  to  commemorate  the  meeting  of  the  Westmin- 
ster Assembly.  And  if  they  be,  then  may  we  not  only 
accomplish  the  object  of  its  Solemn  League  and  Covenant, 
and  realize  its  great  idea  of  a  general  Evangelical  Union  ; 
but  we  may  also,  if  such  be  the  will  of  our  Divine  Head 
and  King,  be  mightily  instrumental  in  promoting  the  uni- 
versal propagation  of  the  Gospel,  and  drawing  down  from 
above  the  fulfilled  answer  to  that  sacred  prayer  m  which 
we  all  unite, — Thy  kingdom  oome  :    Thy  will  be  done  on 

EARTH  AS  it  IS  IN  HEAVEN. 


APPENDIX. 


I. 

(See  page  108.) 

EvERF  person  must  be  aware,  that  one  of  the  charges  most  frequently 
and  vehemently  urged  against  the  Presbyterian  Church  of  Scotland,  is 
that  of  its  being  possessed  by  such  a  bigoted  and  proselytizing  spirit  as 
led  it  to  attempt,  by  undue  means,  to  force  its  own  system  upon  England 
during  the  troubled  period  of  the  civil  war.  In  the  hope  of  showing 
the  utter  groundlessness  of  that  accusation,  and  of  repelling  it  at  once 
and  for  ever,  I  have  resolved  to  append  to  this  work  the  following  im- 
portant document,  which  contains  a  distinct  statement,  by  the  Scottish 
commissioners,  of  the  views  and  desires  entertained  by  the  Church  and 
State  of  Scotland  before  the  civil  war  had  begun.  The  paper  was  writ- 
ten by  Alexander  Henderson,  towards  the  close  of  the  year  1640,  and 
given  in  by  the  Scottish  commissioners  to  the  Lords  of  the  Treaty,  as 
they  were  termed,  in  the  beginning  of  1641,  when  the  business  of  nego- 
tiation had  been  transferred  from  Ripon  to  London.  It  was  printed  and 
published  about  the  same  time,  that  it  mi3ht  be  so  fairly  before  the 
community  as  to  enable  all  whom  it  concerned  to  know  precisely  what 
it  was  that  Scotland  wished  and  recommended,  and  to  prevent,  if  possi- 
ble, all  calumnious  misrepresentation.  Certainly  the  publication  of 
such  a  document  tended,  of  itself,  to  bind  the  Scottish  commissioners, 
and  consequently  the  Scottish  Church  and  kingdom,  whom  they  repre- 
sented, from  making  any  attempt  to  force  their  own  system  upon  Eng- 
land, even  if  they  had  been  afterwards  inclined;  since  it  put  it  in  the 
power  of  the  English  Church  and  Parliament  to  appeal  immediately  to 
this  public  declaration.  There  is  no  doubt  that  it  both  prepared  the 
mind  of  England  for  the  calling  of  the  Westminster  Assembly,  about 
two  years  and  a  half  afterwards,  and  contributed  to  prevent,  for  a  time, 
the  rise  of  any  considerable  degree  of  jealousy  in  the  ecclesiastical  pro- 
ceedings that  followed,  till  the  harmony  that  had  prevailed  was  destroyed 
by  the  Independent  and  Erastian  controversies.  Prelatic  writers  make 
no  mention  of  this  important  document,  and  consequently  indulge  in  the 
most  violent  accusations  against  the  Church  of  Scotland  for  presuming 


APPENDIX.  30* 

to  endeavor  to  enforce  its  system   upon  England.     Let  the  troth  be 
known;  from  that  the  Chnrch  of  Scotland  has  little  to  fear  : — 

"  Our  desires  concerning  unity  in  religion,  and  uniformity   of 

CHURCH     government,     AS  A  SPECIAL    MEAN    TO    CONSERVE    PEACE    IN 
HIS  majesty's  DOMINIONS. 

As  we  shall  not  make  any  proposition  about  this  last  article  of  estab- 
lishina:  a  firm  and  happy  peace,  but  tliat  which  we  conceive  to  be  botl» 
expedient  and  just ;  so  AviU  your  loidships,  we  doubt  not,  in  your  wisdom 
consider,  that  since  that  which  is  sought  is  not  a  cessation  of  arms  for  a 
time,  but  peace  for  ever,  and  not  peace  only,  but  perfect  amity  and  a 
more  near  union  than  before,  which  is  of  greater  consequence  than  all 
the  former  articles,-— it  is  no  marvel  that  a  composition  so  excellent,  and 
so  powerful  to  pr?3t-:--ve  the  whole  island  in  health  against  all  inward 
distempers,  and  in  strength  against  all  contagion  and  wounns  from 
without,  require  many  in^rredients,  of  which,  if  any  one  be  wanting,  we 
may  on  both  sides  please  ourselves  for  the  present  with  the  sweet  name 
of  peace,  and  yet  for  no  long  time  enjoy  peace  itself,  w^hich  hath  it  not 
only  sweetness  and  ])leasure,  but  also  much  more  profit  and  true  honor 
than  all  the  triumphs  on  earth. 

As  we  account  it  no  less  than  usurpation  and  presumption  for  one 
kingdom  or  Church,  were  it  never  so  mighty  and  glorious,  to  give  laws 
and  rules  of  reformation  to  another  free  and  independent  Church  and 
kingdom,  were  it  never  so  mean, — civil  liberty  and  conscience  being  so 
tender  and  delicate,  that  they  canno.  endure  to  be  touched  but  by  such 
as  they  aie  wedded  unto,  and  have  lawful  authority  over  thein, — so  have 
we  not  been  so  forgetful  of  ourselves,  who  are  the  lesser,  and  of  Eng- 
land, which  is  the  greater  kingdom,  as  to  sufl'cr  any  such  arrogant  and 
presumptuous  thoughts  to  enter  into  our  minds,  our  ways  also  are  wit- 
nesses of  the  contrary,  against  the  malicious,  who  do  not  express  what 
we  are  or  have  been,  but  do  still  devise  what  may  be  fuel  for  a  common 
combustion.  Yet  charity  is  no  i)resumption,  and  the  common  duly  of 
charity  bindcth  all  Christians  at  all  times,  both  to  pray  and  profess  their 
desire  that  all  others  were  not  only  almost  but  altogether  such  as  them- 
selves, except  their  afflictions  and  distresses ;  and,  beside  common 
charity,  we  are  bound,  as  commissioners  in  a  special  duty,  to  propound 
the  best  and  readiest  means  for  settling  of  a  firm  peace.  As  we  love 
not  to  be  curious  in  another  commonwealth,  nor  to  play  the  bishop  in 
another  diocese,  so  may  we  not  be  careless  and  negligent  in  that  which 
concerneth  both  nations. 

We  do  all  know  and  profess,  that  religion  is  not  only  the  mean  tc 
serve  God,  and  to  save  our  own  souls,  but  that  it  is  also  the  base  and 
foundation  of  kingdoms  end  the  estates,  and  the  strongest  band  to  tie 
subjects  and  their  prince  in  true  loyalty,  and  to  knit  their  hearts  one  to 
another  in  true  unity.  Nothing  so  powerful  to  divide  the  hearts  of 
people  as  division  in  religion  ;  nothing  so  strong  to  unite  them  as  unity 
in  religion ;  and  the  greater  zeal  in  different  relieions  the  greater 
division  ;  but  the  more  zeal  in  one  religion  the  more  firm  union.  In  the 
paradise  of  nature  the  diversity  of  flowers  and  herbs  is  pleasant  and 
useful;  but  in  the  paradise  of  llu- Church  diflferent  and  contrary  reli- 
26 


302  APPENDIX. 

gions  are  unpleasant  anu  hurtful.  It  is  therefore  to  be  wished  that  there 
were  one  Confession  of  Faith,  one  form  of  Catechism,  one  Directoi^ 
for  all  the  parts  of  the  public  worship  of  God,  and  foj-  prayer,  preaching, 
administration  of  sacraments,  &:.c.,  and  one  form  of  Church  government 
in  all  the  Churches  of  his  Majesty's  dominions. 
This  would,— 

1.  Be  acceptable  to  God  Almighty,  who  delighteth  to  see  his  people 
walking  in  truth  and  unity,  and  who  w^ould  look  upon  this  island  with 
the  greater  complacency  that  we  were  all  of  one  heart  and  one  soul  in 
matters  of  religion. 

2.  This  unity  in  religion  will  preserve  our  peace,  and  prevent  many 
divisions  and  troubles.  Of  old  (as  lieda  recordeth)  the  difierence  about 
the  time  of  observing  of  Easter,  although.no  great  matter  in  religion, 
and  although  in  divers  independent  kingdoms,  had  troubled  their  peace, 
if  the  wiser  sort  had  not  brought  them  to  a  uniformity  wherein  they  were 
so  zealous  that  they  would  not  suffer  so  much  as  one  small  island,  which 
differed  from  the  rest,  to  be  unconform. 

3.  His  majesty  and  his  successors  in  their  government  shall  be  ease;! 
of  much  trouble  which  ariseth  from  differences  of  religion,  and  hath 
been  very  grievous  unto  kings  and  emperors,  as  Eusebius  witnesseth  in 
his  3d  book,  chap.  12,  of  the  life  of  Constantine.  Sedition  begotien  in 
the  Church  of  God  (saith  Constantine)  seemeth  to  me  to  contain  in  itself 
more  trouble  and  bitfemess  than  any  war  or  battle. 

4.  Since,  by  divine  ])rovidence,  his  majesty  is  king  of  divers  king- 
doms, it  shall  be  much  content  both  to  himself,  to  his  nobles  and  court, 
and  to  all  his  people,  when  his  majesty  shall  in  person  visit  any  of  his 
kingdoms,  that  kin?,  court,  and  people  may,  without  all  scruple  of  con- 
science, be  partakers  of  one  and  the  same  form  of  divine  worship,  and 
his  majesty  with  his  court  may  come  to  the  public  assembly  of  the  peo- 
ple, and  serve  God  with  them  according  to  the  practice  of  the  good  kings 
of  Judah;  as,  on  the  other  part,  difference  in  forms  of  divine  worship 
divideth  between  the  king  and  the  people. 

5.  This  shall  be  a  great  comfort  to  all  his  majesty's  subjects  when 
they  travel  abroad  from  thew  own  country  to  any  other  place  in  his 
majesty's  dominions,  whether  for  commerce  or  whatsoever  negotiation 
and  affairs,  that  they  may  with  confidence  resort  to  the  public  worship 
as  if  they  were  at  home,  and  in  their  own  parish  church,  and  shall 
satisfy  many  doubts,  and  remove  many  exceptions,  jealousy,  and  scan- 
dals, which  arise  upon  resorting  to  different  forms  of  worship. 

6.  The  names  of  heresies,  and  sects  of  Puritans,  Conformists,  Sepa- 
ratists, whieh  rend  the  bowels  both  of  Church  and  kingdom,  are  a  mat- 
ter of  much  stumbling  to  the  people,  and  diminish  the  glory  of  his  ma- 
jesty's reign,  shall  no  more  be  heard  ;  but  as  the  Lord  is  one  his  name? 
shall  be  one,  and  the  name  of  the  people  one  in  all  his  majesty's  do- 
minions. 

7.  Papists  and  recusants  shall  des]iair  of  success  to  have  their  religion 
set  up  again,  and  shall  either  conform  themselves  or  get  them  hence^ 
and  irreligious  men  shall  have  a  great  scandal  removed  out  of  their  way, 
which  shall  be  a  mean  of  great  safety  and  sec^irity,  and  of  many  bless- 
ings both  to  king  and  people.  <  I  am  persuaded'  (saith  Constantine,  as 
Eusebius  recordeth  in  his  Life,  lib.  ii.  c.  63),  '  were  I  able,  as  it  is  in 
my  desires,  to  bind  all  the  true  worshippers  of  God  by  the  commor* 


APPENDIX.  303 

bond  of  concord,  all  the  subjects  of  my  empire  would  quickly  turn  them- 
selves to  their  pious  ordinances.' 

8.  This  unity  of  rcli<?ion  shall  make  ministers  to  build  the  Church 
with  both  their  hands,  whilst  now  the  one  hand  is  hulden  out  in  oppo- 
sition asrainst  the  other  parly,  and  sliall  turn  the  many  and  unpleasant 
labor-s  of  writing  and  i-eading  of  unprofitable  controversies  into  treatises 
of  rnortilication,  and  studies  of  devotion  and  practical  divinity. 

This  unity  of  religion  is  a  thing  so  desirable,  that  all  sound  divines 
and  politicians  are  for  it,  where  it  may  be  easily  obtained  and  brought 
about.  And  as  we  conceive  so  pious  and  piofilable  a  work  to  be  worthy 
of  the  best  consideration,  so  are  we  earnest  in  recommending  it  to  your 
lordships,  that  it  may  be  brought  before  his  majesty  and  the  Parliament, 
as  that  which  doth  highly  concern  his  majesty's  honor  and  the  well  of 
all  his  dominions,  and  which,  without  forcing  of  consciences,  seemeth 
not  only  to  be  possible  but  an  easy  work.  But  because  the  matter  is  of 
great  weight,  and  of  a  large  extent,  and  therefore  will  require  a  large 
time,  our  desire  is,  that  for  the  present  some  course  may  be  taken  for  an 
uniformity  in  government. 

1.  Because  there  can  be  small  hope  of  unity  in  religion,  which  is  the 
chief  bond  of  peace  and  human  society,  tinless  first  there  be  one  form  of 
ecclesiastical  government. 

2.  Because  difference  in  this  point  hath  been  the  main  cause  of  all 
other  differences  between  the  two  nations,  since  the  reformation  of 
religion. 

3.  Because  (although  it  ought  not  to  be  so)  we  find  it  true  in  expe- 
rience, that  Churchmen,  Ihi-ough  their  corruption,  are  more  hot  and 
greater  zealots  about  government  than  about  matters  more  substantial, 
— their  worldly  dignities  and  wealth  being  herein  concerned  ;  as  Eras- 
mus rendered  this  reason  of  the  animosity  of  the  Church  of  Rome  against 
Luther,  seeking  after  reformation,  that  he  meddled  with  the  Pope's 
crown  and  the  monks'  bellies. 

4.  It  is  observed  by  politicians,  and  we  have  found  it  in  experience, 
that  Churchmen  do  not  only  bear  with  different  religions,  and  suffer 
divisions  both  in  Church  and  policy  to  rise  and  grow;  but  do  also 
foment  and  cherish  the  contrary  factions,  that  they  themselves  may  grow 
big,  and  swell  in  greatness,  while  both  sides  have  their  dependence  upon 
them,  and  have  their  thoughts  busied  about  other  maltei'S  than  about 
Church  government,  and  the  ambition,  pomp,  and  other  corruptions  of 
Church  governors. 

.^.  None  of  all  the  Reformed  Churches,  although  in  nations  far  dis- 
tant one  from  another,  and  under  divers  princes  and  magistrates,  are  at 
so  great  a  ditfcrence  in  Church  government  as  these  two  kingdoms  be, 
which  are  in  one  island,  and  under  one  monarch— which  made  King 
Jam.es,  of  happy  memory,  to  labor  to  bring  them  under  one  form  of 
government. 

But  since  all  the  question  is,  Whether  of  the  two  Church  governments 
shall  have  place  in  both  nations?  (for  we  know  no  third  form  of  govern- 
ment of  a  National  Church  distinct  from  these  two)  we  do  not  presume 
to  propound  the  form  of  povernmeni  of  the  Church  of  Scotland  as  a  pat- 
tern for  the  Church  of  England,  but  do  only  represent,  in  all  m.odesty, 
these  few  considerations,  according  to  the  tnrst  committed  unto  us. 

1.  The  government  of  the  Church  of  Scotland  is  the  same  with  the 


304  APPENDIX. 

government  of  all  the  Reformed  Churches,  and  hath  been  by  them  uni. 
versally  received  and  practised,  with  the  reformation  of  doctrine  and 
worship;  from  "which  so  far  as  we  depart,  we  disjoin  ourselves  as  far 
from  them,  and  do  lose  so  much  of  our  harmony  with  them.  Whence 
it  is  that  from  other  Reformed  Churches  it  hath  been  written  to  the 
Church  of  Scotland,  ^That  it  was  a  grmt  gift  of  God  that  they  had 
brought  together  into  Scotland,  the  puritxj  of  religion,  and  discipline  whereby 
the  doctrine  is  safely  kept  :  praying  and  beseeching  them  so  to  ke  p  these 
two  together,  as  being  assured  that  if  the  one  fall  the  other  cannot  long 
stand.'  Upon  the  other  part,  the  government  of  the  Church  of  England 
was  not  changed  with  the  doctrine  at  the  time  of  Reformation.  The 
Pope  was  rejected,  but  his  hierarchy  was  retained  ;  which  hath  been  a 
ground  of  jealousy  and  suspicion  to  the  Reformed  Churches,  of  con- 
tinual contention  in  the  Church  of  England  these  eighty  years  past 
(since  the  beginning  of  Queen  Elizabeth,  her  reign),  and  of  hopes  and 
expectation  to  the  Church  of  Rome  ;  for,  saith  Contzen,  in  his  Politicks, 
lib.  ii.  cap.  18,  '  Were  all  England  once  brought  to  approve  of  bishops,  it 
were  easy  to  reduce  it  to  the  Church  of  Rome.'  But  what  one  prince 
hath  begun,  and  by  reason  of  the  times,  or  of  other  hindrances,  coulJ  not 
promote  or  perfect,  another,  raised  up  by  the  mercy  of  God,  may  bring 
to  pass  ;  accordins  to  the  example  of  good  Josiah,  like  unto  whom  there 
was  no  king  before  him — wliich  we  heartily  wish  may  be  verished  of 
King  Charles. 

2.  The  Church  of  Scotland  hath  been  continually,  and  many  sundry 
ways,  vexed  and  disquieted  by  the  bishops  of  England. 

(1.)  By  the  continual  and  restless  negotiation  of  the  prime  prelates 
in  England  with  some  of  that  faction  in  Scotland,  both  before  the  coming 
of  King  James  into  England,  which  we  are  ready  to  make  manifest,  and 
sincp  his  comin?  ;  till  at  last  a  kind  of  Episcopacy  was  erected  tliere  by 
ihe  power  of  the  prelates  of  England,  airainst  the  Confession  of  Faith, 
the  Covenant,  and  Acts  of  the  National  Assemblies  of  the  Church  ol' 
Scotland. 

(2.)  The  prelates  of  England,  without  the  consent  or  knov/ledge  of 
the  Church  of  Scotland,  gave  episcopal  consecration  to  some  corrupt 
ministers  o^  the  Church  of  Scotland,  and  sent  them  home  to  consecrate 
others  like  unto  themselves;  and  when  some  s:reat  men  have  been,  for 
their  obstinacy  in  Papistry,  excommunicated  by  the  Church  of  Scotland, 
they  have  been  absolved  from  the  sentence  by  the  prelates  of  England  ; 
so  that  they  have  usurped  the  power  of  that  which,  in  their  own  opinion, 
is  the  highest  ordination,  and  of  that  which  is  indeed  the  highest  point 
of  jurisdiction. 

(3.)  They  rested  not  here,  but  proceeded  to  change  the  form  of 
divine  worship ;  and  for  many  years  bred  a  great  disturbance,  both  to 
pastors  and  people,  by  five  articles  of  conformity  with  the  Church  of 
England. 

(4.)  Having  in  the  former  prevailed,  and  findin?  their  opportunity, 
and  rare  concourse  of  many  powerful  hands  and  heads  ready  to  co-ope- 
rate, they  made  strons:  assaults  upon  the  whole  external  worship  and 
doctrine  of  our  Church,  by  enforcing  upon  us  a  Popish  Book  of  Common 
Prayer,  for  making  Scotland  first,  as  the  weaker,  and  thereafter  Eng- 
land, conform  to  Rome;  and  upon  the  consciences,  liberties,  and  eoods 
of  the  people,  by  a  Book  of  Canons  and  Constitutions  Ecclesiastical, 


APPENDIX.  305 

establishing  a  tyrannical  power  in  the  persons  of  our  prelates,  and  aho 
lishing  the  wliole  discipline  and  trovernnient  of  our  Church,  without  so 
much  as  consulting  with  any  Presbytery,  Synod,  or  Assembly,  in  all  the 
land. 

(5.)  They  procured  subsidies   to  be  lifted  for  war  against  us,  under 
pain  of  deprivation  to  all  of  the  clergy  that  should  refuse. 

(6.)  They  commanded  both  preaching  and  imprecations  against  us,  as 
enemies  to  God  and  the  kina. 

(7.)  They  have  received  into  the  ministry,  and  provided   places  for 
such  of  our  ministers  as,  for  their  disobedience  to  the  voice  of  the  Assem- 
blv.  and  their  other  faults  and  scandals   were  deposed  in  Scotland.     And 
finally,  they  have  left  nothing  undone  which  might  tend  to  the  overthrow 
of  our  Church,  not  only  of  late,  by  the  occasion  of  these  troubles  whereof 
they  have   been  the  authors,  but  of  old,  from  that  opposition  which  is 
between   episcopal   government  and   the  governu  enl  ot    the   Reformed 
Churches  by  Assemblies.     Uj^on  the  contrary,  the  Church  of  Scotland 
never  had  molested  tiiem,  either  in  the  doctrine,  worship,  ceremonies,  or 
discipline  of  their  Church,  but   have  lived  quietly  by  them,  kept  them- 
selves within  their  line,  and  would  have  been   glad  to  enjoy  their  own 
liberties  in  peace;  which  yet  is,  and   by  the  help  of  God  shall  be,  our 
constant  desire.     Yet  can  we  not  conceal  our  minds,  but  in  our  con- 
sciences, and  before  God,  must  declare,  not  from,  any  sauciness,  or  pre- 
sumptuous intention  to  reform  England,  but  from  our  just   fears    and 
apprehensions,  that  our  reformation,  which  hath  cost  us  so  dear,  and  is 
all  our  wealth  and  glory,  shall  again  be  spoiled  and  defaced  from  Eng- 
land ;  that  whatsoever  peace  shall  be   agreed  upon,  we  cannot  see  nor 
conceive  the  way  how  our  peace  shall  be  firm  and  durable;  but  our  fear 
is,  that  all  will  run  into  a  confusion  asain,  ere  it  be  lone,  if  Episcopacy 
shall  be  retained  in  England  ;  for  the  same  causes  will  not  fail  to  pro- 
duce the  same  effects.     Their  opposition  against,  and    hatred  of,  the 
government  of  the   Reformed   Churches, — their  credit    at   Court,   and 
nearness  to  the  kine,  living  in  England — the  opinion  they  have  of  their 
own  sreat  learnins,  and  of  the  glory  of  their  prelatical  Church,  joincG 
with  the  small  esteem  and  disdain  of  our  Christian  simplicity— the  con- 
saniruinity  of  their  hierarchy  with  the  Church  of  Rome,  and  their  fear  Ic 
fall  before  us  at  last, — will  still  br>  working?,  especially  now,  when  they 
are  made  operative,  and  shall  be  set  on  work  at  the  first  advantage,  by 
their  vindictive  disposition  to  be  avenged  upon  ns  for  the  present  quar- 
rel, which  can  never  be  chanL'ed  by  any  limitations.     As,  on  the  con- 
trarv,  the  cause  being  taken  away,  the  effects  will  cease,  and  the  peace 
shall  be  firm.     It  would  seem  that   limitations,  cautions,  and  trienninl 
Parliaments,  may  do  much  ;  but  we  know  that  fear  of  perjury,  infamy, 
excommunication,  and  the  power  of  a  National  Assembly,  which  w;is  in 
Scotland  as  terrible  to  a  bishop  as  a  Parliament,  could  not  keep  our  men 
from  risinc  to  be  prelates;  and  after  they  had  risen  to  their  greatness, 
their   apolocry   was, — 'These   other  catttions  or   conditions   were    rather 
accepted  of  for  the  time,  to  prevent  all  occasion  of  jangling  xoith  the  con- 
tentious, than  out  of  any  purpose  to  obsrve  them  forever.'     Much   is 
spoken  and  written   for  the  limitations  of  bishops;  but  what  good  can 
their  limitation  do  to  the  Church,  if  ordination  and  ecclesiastical  juris- 
diction shall  depend  upon    them,  and  shall  not  be  absolutely  into  the 
hands  of  the  assemblies  of  the  Church;  and   f  it  shall  not  depend  upon 
26* 


306  .'iPI'EMDIX. 

them,  what  shall  their  oflice  be  above  other  pastors  ?  or  how  shall  their 
labors  be  worthy  so  large  wages '/  What  service  can  they  do  to  King;, 
Church,  or  State  ?  Roine  and  Spain  may  be  glad  at  the  retaining  of  the 
name  of  Bishops,  more  than  the  Reformed  Churches,  which  expect  from 
us  at  this  time  some  matter  of  rejoicing. 

3.  The  Reformel  Churches  do  hold  without  doubting,  their  Church- 
officers,  Pastors,  Doctors,  Elders,  and  Deacons,  and  their  Church  gov- 
ernment by  Assemblies,  to  be  jure  divino,  and  perpetual,  as  is  manifesf 
in  all  their  writings.  And  on  the  other  hand.  Episcopacy,  as  it  difiereth 
from  the  office  of  Pastor,  is  almost  universally  acknowledged,  even  by 
th?  bishops  themselves,  and  their  adherents,  to  be  but  a  human  ordi- 
nance, established  by  law  and  custom  for  conveniency,  without  war- 
rant of  Scripture:  Avhich,  therefore,  by  human  authority  may  be  altered 
and  abolished,  upon  so  great  a  conveniency  as  is  the  hearty  conjunction 
with  all  the  Reformed  Churches,  and  a  durable  peace  of  the  two  king- 
doms, which  have  been  formerly  divided  by  this  partition-wall.  We 
therefore  desire,  that  jus  divinum  and  humanum,  conscience  and  con- 
veniency, yea,  the  greater  conveniency  with  the  lesser,  and,  we  may 
add,  a  conveniency  and  an  inconveniehcy,  may  be  compared,  and  equally 
weighed  in  the  balance,  without  adding  any  weight  of  prejudice. 

4.  The  Church  of  Scotland,  warranted  by  authority,  hath  abjured 
Episcopal  government,  as  having  no  warrant  in  Scripture,  and  by  solemn 
oath  and  covenant  divers  times  before,  and  now  again  of  late,  hath  es- 
tablished the  government  of  the  Church  by  Assemblies;  but  England, 
neither  having  abjured  the  one  nor  sworn  the  other,  hath  I ibert}^  from 
all  bands  of  this  kind  to  make  choice  of  that  which  is  most  warrantable 
by  the  Word  of  God.  And,  lest  it  be  thought  that  we  have  wilfully 
bound  ourselves  of  late  by  oath  that  we  be  not  pressed  with  a  change, 
we  desire  it  to  be  considered,  that  our  late  oath  was  nothing  but  the 
renovation  of  our  former  oath  and  Covenant,  which  did  bind  our  Chui'ch 
before,  but  was  transgressed  of  many  by  means  of  the  prelates. 

5.  If  it  shall  please  the  Lord  to  move  the  king's  heart  to  choose  this 
course,  he  shall,  in  a  better  way  than  was  projected,  accomplish  tlie 
great  and  glorious  design  which  King  James  had  before  his  eyes  all  his 
tiine,  of  the  unity  of  religion  and  Church  government  in  all  his  dominions, 
— his  crowns  and  kingdoms  shall  be  free  of  all  assaults  and  policies  oi 
Churchmen.  Which,  whether  in  the  way  of  ecclesiastical  jurisdictiv/n 
and  Church  censure,  or  by  complyins:  with  the  Pope,  the  greatest  enewiy 
of  monarchy;  or  by  bringing  civil  governments  into  a  confusion,  or  by 
taking  the  fat  of  the  sacrifice  to  themselves,  when  the  people  are  pleased 
with  the  government,  and  when  they  are  displeased,  by  transferring  the 
hatred  upon  authority, — which  was  never  woo*  to  be  done  by  any  good 
statesmen  :  all  which,  all  these  ways,  have  proceeded  from  bishops  seek- 
ing their  own  greatness,  never  from  Assemblies,  which,  unless  overruled 
by  bishops,  have  been  a  strong  guard  to  monarchy  and  magistracy, — 
both  the  one  and  the  other  being  the  ordinances  of  God.  The  Church 
shall  be  peaceably  governed,  by  common  consent  of  Churchmen,  in  As- 
semblies,— in  which  the  king's  majesty  hath  always  that  eminency  which 
is  due  unto  the  supreme  magistrate,  and  by  which  all  heresies,  errors 
and  schisms,  abounding  under  Episcopal  government,  shall  be  suppress- 
ed;  and  the  State,  and  all  civil  matters,  in  Parliament,  Council,  and 
other  inferior  judicatures,  governed  by  civil  men,  and  not  by  Churchmen. 


APPEKDIX.  307 

—who,  being  out  of  the.'r  own  clement,  must  nee']?;  stir  nnd  make  trou- 
ble to  themselves  and  the  whole  Slate,  as  woful  experience  hath  lauj^ht. 
The  work  shall  be  better  done,  and  the  means  which  did  uphold  their 
unprofitable  pomp  and  greatness  may  supply  the  wants  of  many  preach-- 
jng  ministers  to  be  provided  to  places;  and,  wilhout  the  smallest  lo?s  or 
aamagc  to  the  subjects,  may  be  a  great  increase  of  his  majesty's  reve- 
Jines.  His  royal  authority  shall  be  more  deeply  rooted  in  the  united 
hearts,  and  more  strongly  guarded  by  the  joint  forces,  of  his  subjects,  as 
if  they  were  a. 1  of  one  kingdom;  and  his  greatness  shall  be  enlarged 
abroad  by  becoming  the  head  of  all  the  Protestants  in  Europe,  to  the 
^'reater  horror  of  his  enemies,  and  to  the  sowing  of  greatness  to  his  pos- 
terity and  royal  succession.  All  which  we  entreat  may  be  represented 
unto  his  majesty  and  the  Houses  of  Parliament,  as  the  expression  of  our 
desires  and  fears,  and  as  a  testimony  of  our  faithfulness  in  acquitting 
ourselves  in  the  trust  committed  unto  us;  but  no  ways  forgetting  our 
distance,  or  intending  to  pass  our  bounds,  in  prescribirig  or  setting'down 
rules  to  their  wisdom  and  authority,  which  we  do  highly  reverence  and 
honor,  and  from  which  only,  as  the  proper  ibuntain,  the  laws  and  order 
of  reformation  in  this  Church  and  Policy  must  proceed,  for  the  nearer 
union  and  greater  happiness  of  his  majesty's  dominions," 

Let  the  thoughtful  reader  ponder  well  the  deep  meaning  of  this  remark- 
able document ;  and  while  he  will  perceive  in  it  a  complete  vindication 
of  the  Church  of  Scotland,  he  will  also  be  constrained,  when  he  contem- 
plates the  present  sufferings  of  that  Church,  to  admire  the  almost  pro- 
phetic foresight  of  that  great  man  by  whom  i1  was  written,  who  saw 
clearly  that  the  Prelatic  spirit  would  never  cease  to  strive  for  the  over- 
throw of  the  Presbyterian  Church. 


II. 

(Seepages  174,207.) 

So  much  reference  has  been  made  by  a  certain  class  of  writers  to  the 
name  and  reputation  of  the  learned  Selden,  and  the  influence  which  he 
is  said  to  have  exercised  in  the  Westminster  Assembly,  that  I  have 
tliou2:ht  it  expedient  to  state  his  arguments  more  fully  in  the  body  of  the 
Work  than  their  own  merit  seems  to  me  to  deserve.  '  I  have  given  them 
also  as  reported  by  Lightfoot,  who  being  likewise  an  Erasf  ian"^  cannot  be 
suspected  of  doin^r  them  in  injustice.  But  as  the  same  discussion  is 
reported  in  Gillespie's  own  notes  of  the  Assembly's  proceeding's,  I  am 
persuaded  that  the  general  reader  will  peruse  the  following  extra«:t  with 
considerable  curiosity  and  interest  : — 

"  DEBATE    RESPECTIJCG    MATTHEW    XVIII. 

«  Mr.  Selden  said.  There  is  nothing  in  Matthew  xviii.  cf  excommunN 
cation  or  jurisdiction,    which   could   not  be  exercised  by  the  ancient 


308  APPENDIX. 

Church,  till  the  Church  of  Rome  got  their  power  from  the  emperor- 
That  some  late  men — as  Dominicus  Solo,  and  Sayrus,  and  Henriquez— 
say  that  there  is   some  power  given  to  the  Church,  which  the  Church 
afterwards  did  specificate  to  be  a  power  of  excommunication.     He  said, 
Matthew's  Gospel  was  the  first  that  was  written,  about  eight  years  aftei 
Christ's  ascension,  the  first  year  of  Claudius  ;  that  it  was  written  in 
Hebrew,  and  translated  into  Greek  by  John ;  that  though  the  Hebrew 
that  Matthew  wrote  be  not  extant,  yet  two  editions  of  the  Gospel  (are) 
in  Hebrew,  one  by  Munster,  another  by  Tilius  ;  that  we  find  in  Tilius' 
edition  Kahal,  Matt,  xviii.,  and  Guedah,  Matt,  xviii.,  though   in  Mun- 
ster's  Kahal  be  in  both  places.     Now,  there  being  no  place  of  the  New 
Testament  written  when  this  was  written,  we  must  expound  it  by  the 
custom  of  the  Jews,  which,  according  to  the  law  (Lev.  xix.  17),  was, 
that  when  one  oflended  his  brother,  the  offended  brother  required  satis- 
faction ;  and  if  he  get  it  not,  speak  to  him  before  two  or  three  witnesses ; 
and  if  he  hear  them  not,  to  tell  it  to  a  greater  number  (for  which  he  of- 
fered to  show  many  Hebrew  authors  and  Talmudists).     That  they  had 
in  Jerusalem,  beside  the  great  sanhedrim,  two  courts  of  23,  and  in  every 
city  one  court  of  23.     That  the  casting  out  of  the  synagogue  was  only 
the  putting  of  a  man  in  that  condition  that   he  might  not  come  within 
four  cubits  of  another;  that  any  man  being  twelve  years  of  age  might 
excommunicate  another ;  not  that  he  was  altogether  cast  off  from  having 
anythinsT  to  do  with  the  synagogue.    He  said  the  convocation  was  called 
C'lerus  Anglicanus,  and  the  parliament  Populus  Anglicanus.     So  here 
Guedah  and  e^-vA^tio   signifies   only  a  select  number ;  that  the  word  is 
used  in  one  place  for  woman  ;  Deut.  xxiii.,  shall  not  enter  into  the  con- 
gregation.    That  Christ,  when   he  said  'Die  Ecclesioe,'  was  in  Caper- 
naum, where  there  was  a  court  of  23  ;  that  the  meaning  is,  tell  the  san- 
hedrim, which  can  redress  the  wrong.     That  if  the  Jewish  State  had 
been  Christian,  their  civil  government  might  have  continued,  though  the 
ceremonies  were  gone ;  so  that  ecclesia  here  would  have  been   a  civil 
court." 

Gillespie's  answer,  as  given  by  himself,  is  as  follows : — 

"  It  is  a  spiritual,  not  a  civil,  court  which  is  meant  by  '  the  Church,' 
Matt,  xviii.;  for,  1.  Subjecia  materia  is  spiritual.  If  thy  brother  tres- 
pass against  thee,  is  not  meant  of  personal  or  civil  injuries,  but  of  any 
scandal  given  to  our  brother,  whereby  we  trespass  against  him,  inas- 
much as  we  trespass  against  the  law  of  charity,  Augustine  and  Testatns 
expound  it  of  any  scandal,  and  the  coherence  confirmeth  it;  for  scandals 
were  spoken  of  before  in  that  chapter.  2.  The  end  is  spiritual — the 
gaining  of  the  offender's  soul,  which  is  not  the  end  of  a  civil  court. 
3.  The  persons  are  spiritual,  for  Christ  speaks  to  his  apostles.  4.  The 
manner  of  proceeding  is  spiritual  (verses  19,  20) — prayer,  and  doing  all 
in  the  name  of  Christ;  which  places,  not  only  our  Divines,  but  Testatus 
and  Hugo  Cardinalis,  expound  of  meetings  for  Church  censures,  not  of 
meetings  for  worship.  5.  The  censure  is  spiritual — binding;  of  the  soul, 
or  retaining  of  sins.  (Verse  18,  compared  with  Matt.  xvi.  19 ;  John 
XX.  23.)  6.  Christ  would  not  have  sent  his  disciples  for  pi-ivate  inju- 
ries to  a  civil  court,  especially  those  Avho  were  living  among  heathens, 
(1  Cor.  vi.  1).  7.  If  we  look  even  to  the  Jewish  customs,  they  had  spi- 
ritual eensures.     To  be  held  as  a  heathen  man  and  a  publican,  imports 


APPENDII.  309 

a  restraint  fl  sacr/s ;  for  heathens  were  not  admitted  into  the  temple. 
(Ezek.  xliv.  7,  9;  Acts  xxi.  28).  So  the  profane  were  debarred  from 
the  temple.  Josephus  'Aniiq.,  lib.  xix.  chap.  \7)  tells  us  that  one  Simon, 
a  doctor  of  the  law  of  Moses,  in  JenisahMn,  did  accuse  Kiii^  As;rippi  as 
a  wiciied  man,  that  should  not  l)e  admitted  into  the  temple.  Pliilo  Lib. 
De  Sacrificaniibus)  writelh,  it  was  the  custom  in  his  own  time  that  a 
raanslayer  was  not  admitted  into  the  temple.  The  Scripture  also  giveth 
li'^ht  in  this  ;  for  if  they  that  were  ceremonially  unclean  might  not  entei 
into  the  temple,  how  shall  we  think  that  they  which  were  morally  un- 
clean might  enter  ?" 

The  close  coincidence  of  the  debate,  as  here  given,  with  the  account 
of  it  in  Lightfoot's  journal,  will  at  once  be  perceived,  confirming  the 
authenticity  of  both  ;  the  chief  difference  between  them  being,  that  Gil- 
lespie's is  the  more  clear  and  succinct  of  the  two,  as  might  have  been 
expected  from  his  intellectual  pre-eminence. 

V^^'hile  giving  some  fragmentary  records  of  the  opinions  of  the  leading 
men  among  the  Westminster  Divines  on  peculiar  points,  it  may  not  be 
inexpedient  to  show  what  were  the  sentiments  of  Gillespie  on  the  sub- 
ject of  the  election  of  ministers,  and  how  far  these  were  entertained  by 
the  Church  of  Scotland  at  that  period,  and  are  identical  with  those  held 
by  the  Evanijelical  majority  of  the  present  time.  The  arguments  of 
Henderson,  Gillespie,  and  Rutherford  have  been  already  stated,  as  used 
by  them  in  the  debate  on  the  subject,  an  account  of  which  will  be  found 
in  pa2:e  151  of  this  work.  On  a  subsequent  occasion,  when  Gillespie, 
in  ins  Male  Audis,  was  answering  the  Erastian  arguments  of  Coleman 
and  Hussey,  the  subject  came  asain  under  discussion,  and  drew  forth 
from  Gillespie  a  re-statement  of  his  opinion.  Hussey  had  boldly  af- 
firmed, that  the  Parliament  may  require  such  as  they  receive  for  preach- 
ers of  truth,  "  to  send  out  able  men  to  supply  the  places,  and  that  ivithoiU 
any  rei^ard  to  the  allowance  or  disallowance  of  the  people."  This  truly 
tyrannical  theory  Gillespie  strongly  condemns;  reminds  his  opponent 
that  one,  and  not  the  least,  of  the  controversies  between  the  Papists  and 
the  Protestants  is,  what  right  the  Church  hath  in  the  vocation  of  minis- 
ters ;  refers  to  the  Helvetic  Confession,  which  says,  that  the  riglit 
choosing  of  ministers  is  by  the  consent  of  the  Church,  and  to  the  Belgic 
Confession,  which  says,  "  We  believe  that  the  ministers,  seniors,  and 
deacons,  ou<?ht  to  be  called  to  these  their  functions,  and  by  the  lawful 
election  of  the  Church  to  be  advanced  into  these  rooms  ;"  addin?,  "l 
mijht  here,  if  it  were  requisite,  bring  a  heap  of  testimonies  from  the 
Protestant  writers,  the  least  thing  which  they  can  admit  of  is,  that  a 
minister  be  not  obtruded  renitenfe  ecclesid.  It  may  be  helped  when  it  is 
done,  without  making  null  or  void  the  ministry  ;  but  in  a  well-constitut- 
e.l  Church  there  ought  to  be  no  intrusion  into  the  ministry."  (Male 
Audis,  p.  27.) 

In  his  "  Miscellany  Questions,"  the  last  work  that  came  from  his  pen, 
Gillespie  discusses  the  question,  "  Of  the  Election  of  Pastors  with  the 
Congregation's  consent,"  in  a  chapter  of  24  pages,  statin?  tlie  various 
opinions  held  by  Prelatists,  Sectarians,  and  others,  explaining  what  he  re- 
garded to  be  the  system  of  the  Church  cf  Scotland,  and  answering  ob- 
jections. He  cites  with  approbation  the  opinions  of  the  Reformers 
Luther,  Calvin,  Zanchius,  Beza,  and  many  others,  all  of  whom  main- 
tained, ut  sine  populi  consensu  et  suffragio  nemo  legitime  electus,  that 


310  APPEXUIX 

without  the  consent  an  J  suffrage  of  the  people  no  person  was  lawfully 
elected  :  also  the  strong  language  of  the  First  and  Second  Books  of  Dis- 
cipline,— "  This  lib?rt}'  with  all  care  mast  be  preserved  to  every  several 
kiik,  to  have  their  votes  and  suffrages  in  election  of  their  ministers," 
and  "  it  is  to  be  eschewed  that  any  person  be  intruded  in  any  offices  of 
the  Kirk,  contrary  to  the  will  of  the  congregation  to  which  they  are  ap- 
pointed," adding  several  acts  of  Assembly  to  the  same  effect.  In  an 
swering  objections,  hi?  own  opinion  comes  very  clearly  into  view.  As, 
for  instance,  "  Objection — This  liberty  granted  to  congregations,  pre- 
judgeth  the  right  of  patrons.  Answer — If  it  were  so,  yet  the  argument 
is  not  pungent  in  divinity,  for  why  should  not  human  right  give  place  to 
Divine  right  ?  »  The  states  of  Zealand  did  abolish  patronages,  and  give 
to  eacli  congregation  the  free  election  of  their  own  minister,  which  I 
take  to  be  one  cause  why  religion  flnurisheth  better  there  than  in  any 
other  of  the  United  Provinces."  Again,  it  is  objected,  "  That  the 
Church's  liberty  of  consenting  or  not  consenting,  must  ever  be  under- 
stood to  be  rational,  so  that  the  Church  may  not  disassent  without  ob- 
jecting somewhat  against  the  doctrine  or  life  of  the  person  presented." 
(There  is  nothing  new,  it  seems,  even  in  the  objections  of  Law  Lords 
and  Moderates.)  In  answer  to  this,  Gillespie  first  cites  authorities  to 
prove  that  this  argument  is  the  very  one  used  by  Popish  and  Prelatic 
writers,  in  defence  of  their  systems,  which  allowed  no  shadow  of  liberty 
to  the  people,  and  then  exclaims,  "  Now,  then,  if  this  be  all  that  people 
may  object,  it  is  no  more  than  Prelates,  yea  Papists,  have  yielded. 
This  objection  cannot  strike  against  the  election  of  a  pastor  by  the 
judgment  and  votes  of  the  particular  eldership  of  that  church  where  he 
is  to  serve.  Men  vote  in  elderships,  as  in  all  courts  and  consistories, 
freely  according  to  the  judgment  of  their  conscience,  and  are  not  called 
to  an  account  for  a  reason  of  their  votes.  As  the  vote  of  the  eldership 
is  a  free  vote,  so  is  the  congregation's  consent  a  free  consent.  Any 
man,  though  not  a  member  of  the  congregation,  hath  place  to  object 
against  the  admission  of  him  that  is  presented,  if  he  know  such  an  im- 
pediment as  may  make  him  incapable,  either  at  all  of  the  ministry,  or 
of  the  ministry  of  that  church  to  which  he  is  presented.  So  that  unless 
the  congregation  have  somewhat  more  than  liberty  of  objecting,  they 
shall  have  no  privilege  or  liberty,  but  that  which  is  common  to  strau- 
,gers  as  well  as  to  them.  Though  nothing  be  objected  against  the  man's 
doctrine  or  life,  yet  if  the  people  desire  another  better,  or  as  v/elJ  quali- 
fie-d,  by  whom  they  find  themselves  more  edified  than  by  the  other,  that 
is  a  .reason  sufficient,  if  a  reason  must  be  given  at  all." 

But  we  cannot  afford  space  for  mere  quotations,  nor  can  it  be  necessa- 
ry to  do  so  as  those  already  produced  must  convince  every  unprejudiced 
person  that  the  Church  of  Scotland  held  then,  as  in  tlie  days  of  Knox, 
and  always  down  to  the  present  time,  that  congregations  possess  the 
inherent  ri-jbt  of  choosing  their  own  pastors;  and  that  when  patronage 
interfered  with  this  right,  the  very  least  privilege  to  which  they  were  en- 
titled, was  the  expression  of  their  free  consent,  or  equally  free  dissent, 
without  being  obliged  to  assign  reasons  for  either,  and  that  no  man  should 
be  intruded  contrary  to  that  free  expression  of  their  mind  and  will. 
And  these  opinions  of  Gilhspie,  according  to  Baillie,  were  held  by  the  ma- 
jority of  the  Assembly  of  1649,  when  preparing  a  new  Directory  for  the 
election  of  ministers,  after  the  abolition  of  patronage  by  the  Parliament. 


APPENDIX.  31 

Ytt  the  Church  of  Scotland  i?  t;^.  be  overthrown,  or  disestablished,  on  the 
sfrensrtli  of  the  utterly  false  assertion,  tliat  the-  principle  that  "  No  pas 
top  be  intruded  into  a  parish  contrary  to  the  will  of  the  conj^res^ation,*' 
was  never  heard  of  till  the  year  1834  !  Th-e  Church  of  Scotland  (not 
that  Erastian  body  termed  the  moderate  party)  appeals  to  the  history  ol 
tlie  past,  to  an  impartial  and  unprejudiced  posterity,  to  her  own  Stan- 
dards, to  the  Sacred  Scriptures,  and  to  her  sole  head  and  King,  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  and  calmly  abides  the  judgment. 


III. 

(Seepage  219.) 


**  An  Ordinance  of  the  Lords  and  Commoks  assembled  in  Parlia 
MENT,  ABOUT  SUSPENSION  FROM  THE  Lord's  Supper/'  20th  Octo- 
ber, 1645. 

It  w^as  my  intention  to  have  inserted  the  whole  of  this  important  ordi- 
nance in  the  Appendix,  for  the  purpose  of  showing  the  exact  point  in 
which  the  Westminster  Assembly  and  the  Parliament  disagreed,  as  well 
as  the  extent  to  which  they  were  of  one  mind.  But  as  that  has  been 
done  with  considerable  distinctness  in  the  body  of  the  work,  and  as  I 
am  desirous  to  avoid  all  unnecessary  expansion,  it  seems  to  me  expedient 
lor  the  present  to  suppress  that  rather  prolix  document,  reserving  to  my- 
self the  power  of  inserting  it  in  a  future  edition,  should  it  be  then  thought 
desirable,  or  should  I  prosecute  the  intention  of  enlarging  the  work. 


IV. 

(See  page  222.) 

"  An  Ordinance  or  the  Lords  and  Commons  assembled  in  Parlia- 
ment, concerning  the  choice  of  Elders."     14th  March,  1646. 

For  the  reasons  above  stated,  and  with  still  greater  reluctance,  I  have 
esolved  to  abstain  from  inserting  this  ordinance  also.  And  I  may  add, 
that  had  the  plan  of  the  present  work,  and  the  dimensions  within  which 
it  was  judged  necessary  to  confine  it  permitted,  there  are  a  number  of 
very  important  documents,  little  known  or  regarded,  which  might  have 
been  inserted  in  the  Appendix,  and  would  have  formed  a  very  valuable 
addition  to  the  means  by  which  the  general  reader  may  aciiuire  some 
adequate  knowledge  of  the  true  history  and  character  of  the  Westmin- 
ster Assembly  of  Divines. 


Princeton  Theological  Seminary  l-ib>;a''|es 


1    1012  01236  0857 


